HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIS Agenda - 2019-04-15Community & Infrastructure Services Committee
Agenda
Monday, April 15, 2019
10:00 a.m. 12:30 p.m.
Office of the City Clerk
Council Chamber
Kitchener City Hall
nd
200 King St. W. - 2 Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
Page 1 Chair - Councillor K. Galloway-Sealock Vice-Chair - Councillor D. Schnider
Consent Items
The following matters are considered not to require debate and should be approved by one motion in accordance
with the recommendation contained in each staff report. A majority vote is required to discuss any report listed as
under this section.
1. DSD-19-071 - Rate of Speed Huron Road Fischer Hallman Road to Amand Drive
2. DSD-19-072 - Noise Exemption MTO Highway 401 at Homer Watson Boulevard Interchange
3. DSD-19-069 - Patricia Avenue Traffic Calming Review
4. DSD-19-070 - Caryndale Drive Traffic Calming Review
5. DSD-19-073 - Old Chicopee Drive Traffic Calming Review
6. CSD-19-009 - Licence Agreement Unifor Baseball Diamonds, 600 Wabanaki Drive, Kitchener
Delegations
-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of five
(5) minutes.
None at this time.
Discussion Items
7. DSD-19-094 - Corporate Climate Action Plan (45 min)
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter)
(Materials will be provided under separate cover on April 12, 2019)
8. INS-19-008 - Approval of Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy (2019 2028) & (45 min)
Implementation Plan
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter)
9. CSD-19-008 - Administrative Monetary Penalty System (AMPS) (30 min)
Information Items
Unfinished Business List
Dianna Saunderson
Committee Administrator
** Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to take
part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 **
REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure ServicesCommittee
th
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Barry Cronkite, Director,Transportation Services
519-741-2200 ext.7738
PREPARED BY:Eric Bentzen-Bilkvist, Traffic Technologist, (519) 741-2200 x7372
WARD (S) INVOLVED:Ward5
th
DATE OF REPORT:March 7, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-071
SUBJECT:Rate of Speed Huron Road Fischer Hallman Road to Amand Drive
___________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
That a 60 km/h speed limit be implemented on Huron Road from Fischer Hallman Road to
Amand Drive; and further,
That the Uniform Traffic Bylaw be amended accordingly.
BACKGROUND:
Current motoristspeed on Huron Road from Fischer Hallman Road to Amand Drive hasbeen
identified as potential safety concernby area residents and Transportation Services. Huron
Road iscurrently designated as anarterial roadway from Trussler Road to Homer Watson
Boulevard and has a maximumposted speed limitof80km/h.The sectionof Huron Road
between Fisher Hallman Road and Amand Drive hasresidential development, schools and RBJ
Schlegel Park adjacent to the road due to growth in the area.
REPORT:
Transportation Services recommends a decrease in the posted speed limit from 80km/h to
60km/h on Huron Road from Fisher Hallman Road to Amand Drive. This reduction of the posted
speed limit to 60km/h is a reflection of the residential development in the area, as well as a near
byschool and adjacent park land.
Huron Road from Trussler Road to Amand Drive is recommended to remain an 80km/h speed
zone due to the undeveloped land surrounding the road. Transportation Services willre-evaluate
this area asthe area is developed.
***This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994for assistance.
1 - 1
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
trategic vision through
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The total cost of installing the correct signage is approximately $800dollars and will be taken
from the existing sign maintenance budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM
council / committee meeting.
CONSULT This recommendation has been communicated with the local Ward Councillor.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager
Development Services Department
Attached:
Appendix A Huron Road
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
1 - 2
Key Map
Huron RoadArea ofConcern Proposed 60km/h Zone
Area of Recommended Speed
Limit Reduction onHuron Road
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
1 - 3
REPORT TO:Community & Infrastructure ServicesCommittee
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Barry Cronkite, Director of Transportation Services,
519-741-2200, ext. 7738
PREPARED BY:Stephanie Brasseur, Traffic Project Coordinator 519-741-2200,
ext. 7373
WARD (S) INVOLVED:Ward 8
DATE OF REPORT:March 21, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-072
SUBJECT:Noise Exemption MTO Highway 401 at Homer Watson
Boulevard Interchange
___________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario (MTO) and its contractors be exempt from the
provisions of Chapter 450 Noise of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code Article 6
Construction Work during the pavement rehabilitation of the Highway 401 and Homer
Watson Boulevard Interchange in the City of Kitchener. The request for the noise by-law
exemption is between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. for the period of August 1 to
December 31, 2019.
BACKGROUND:
The MTO is in theprocess of completing the Class Environmental Assessment and detailed
design for the Highway 401 pavement rehabilitation required east and west of the Homer Watson
Boulevard interchange. This work includes the rehabilitation of the Homer Watson Boulevard
underpass. The area of work is shown in the attached key planin Appendix A.
REPORT:
In order to complete the Highway 401 pavement rehabilitation, thefollowing project information
includes:
-of-way.
For the period August 1 to December 31, long duration closures of the Homer Watson
Boulevard ramps will be required to complete the necessary pavement rehabilitation.
Rehabilitation of the Highway 401 at the Homer Watson Boulevard will be completed with
temporary lane closures as required.
Timing of these works will be confirmed closer to the commencement of the project.
***This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994for assistance.
2 - 1
Night-time construction is proposed where needed in order to minimize construction
duration and avoid significant disruption to the Highway 401 and interchange traffic.
Night work is required for a portion of one construction season from August to December
2019with anticipated hours between10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.Hours and dates will be
confirmed in a scheduleprovided by the contractorwith specific times closer to thedate
of construction.
Thepavement rehabilitation night work generally involves; set up and take down of traffic control
measures, removal of asphalt pavement,and paving operations. The noise involved with this
workincludes: generators to provide night time lighting, operation of milling machines, dump
trucks and diesel powered equipment for loading/unloading.
ALIGNMENTWITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM This report has been he
council / committee meeting.
CONSULTStantec Consulting Ltdwill provide aletter of notificationto the surrounding
residents/businesses within 400 metres of the work area in advance of the commencement of
the work detailing the work to be completed and approximate scheduling.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
Department
Attached:
Appendix A Stantec Consulting Ltdnoise exemption for overnight pavement rehabilitation
letter dated February 19, 2019.
2 - 2
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
600-171 Queens Avenue, London ON N6A 5J7
February 19, 2019
File: 165001116
Attention: Stephanie Brasseur
By-law Enforcement
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kingston, ON N2G 4G7
Stephanie.Brasseur@kitchener.ca
Reference: Detail Design and Class Environmental Assessment (G.W.P. 3022-18-00) - Highway 401
at Homer Watson Boulevard Interchange Rehabilitation - Request for Exemption from
Noise By-law to Facilitate Night Work
The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) retained Stantec Consulting Ltd. to complete the Detail
Design and Class Environmental Assessment (EA) study for the Highway 401 pavement rehabilitation east
and west of the Homer Watson Boulevard interchange, including the rehabilitation of the Homer Watson
Boulevard Underpass. The study area is within the City of Cambridge, City of Kitchener and the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo, as shown in the attached key plan.
Project Overview
Construction activities will be contained within the MTO’s existing right-of-way. Long duration closures of
the westbound on-ramp (e.g., ramp from southbound Homer Watson Boulevard to westbound Highway
401) and eastbound on-ramp (e.g., ramp from northbound Homer Watson Boulevard to eastbound Highway
401) are necessary for pavement rehabilitation. Rehabilitation of Highway 401 at the Homer Watson
interchange, including Homer Watson Boulevard/Fountain Street and the interchange ramps will be
completed with temporary lane closures, as required. Specific timing and details of the closures are to be
confirmed. Night-time construction is proposed where feasible in order to minimize construction duration
and avoid significant disruption to Highway 401 and interchange traffic. Pedestrian access will be
maintained on the east side of Homer Watson Boulevard during construction.
Purpose of Noise By-law Exemption Request
The purpose of this letter is to request an exemption from the City’s Noise By-law, pertaining to prohibited
hours for construction, during the period of construction. Night-time construction is proposed for select
operations in order to minimize construction duration and avoid significant disruption to Highway 401 traffic.
We are requesting the exemption for a portion of one construction season (i.e., beginning of August to the
end of December 2019).
2 - 3
February 19, 2019
Stephanie Brasseur
Page 2 of 3
Reference: Detail Design and Class Environmental Assessment (G.W.P. 3022-18-00) - Highway 401 at Homer Watson Boulevard
Interchange Rehabilitation - Request for Exemption from Noise By-law to Facilitate Night Work
The following information is provided in support of our application:
Applicant: Ontario Ministry of Transportation, West Region
rd
Floor
659 Exeter Road, 3
London ON N6E 1L3
Attention: Mr. Fahmi Choudhury, Senior Project Engineer
Planning and Design Section
Tel: 519-873-4576
Note: Private construction firms, working under Contract for the MTO, will undertake the work.
Nature of Night Work
The nature of night work includes setup and take down of traffic control measures, removal of asphalt
pavement, and paving operations. This includes setup of temporary concrete barriers, temporary signs, and
pavement markings. During night-time construction, the primary sources of noise will include generators to
provide night-time lighting, operation of milling machines, dump trucks, and diesel-powered equipment for
loading/unloading.
Project information in the form of a Notice of Study Commencement will be sent to municipalities,
institutions, service providers, local business owners, industries, and the public with an interest in the
project, including adjacent property owners and local residents.
The Contract Administrator will monitor and investigate any complaints regarding construction noise
according to the provisions of the MTO’s Environmental Guide for Noise.
We would appreciate your consideration of this request, at your earliest opportunity so that MTO may
proceed to tender the project in the spring 2019, subject to receipt of all approvals. If you require anything
further, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Regards,
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
Paula Burnard MScPl, MCIP, RPP
Senior Environmental Planner
Phone: 519-675-6666
Fax: 519-645-6575
paula.burnard@stantec.com
c.F. Choudury – Senior Project Engineer, MTO West Region
K. Jansen – Environmental Planner, MTO West Region
K. Welker – Consultant Project Manager, Stantec Consulting Ltd.
2 - 4
February 19, 2019
Stephanie Brasseur
Page 3 of 3
Reference: Detail Design and Class Environmental Assessment (G.W.P. 3022-18-00) - Highway 401 at Homer Watson Boulevard
Interchange Rehabilitation - Request for Exemption from Noise By-law to Facilitate Night Work
Key Plan
2 - 5
REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
th
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Barry Cronkite, Director, Transportation Services,
519-741-2200 ext. 7738
PREPARED BY:Eric Bentzen-Bilkvist, Traffic Technologist, (519) 741-2200 x7372
WARD (S) INVOLVED:Ward 9
th
DATE OF REPORT:March 25, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-069
SUBJECT:Patricia Avenue Traffic CalmingReview
_______________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That a speed hump be installed on Patricia Avenue between Sandra Avenue and Jack Avenue;
That a raised pedestrian crossingbe installed on Patricia Avenue at the Henry Strum Greenway
trail crossing, between Metzloff Avenue and Highland Road West;
That a Level 2 Type D pedestrian crossover be incorporated into the raised trail crossing, and
further;
That the Uniform Traffic By-Law be amended accordingly.
BACKGROUND:
Traffic volume and speeding are significant safety related issues frequently raised by residents of affected
neighbourhoods in the City of Kitchener. In response to these issues, Council reviewed, updated and
subsequently adopted Traffic Calming Policy in 2014 and established an annual budget to
address traffic management issues in residential neighbourhoods. The traffic calming policy outlines a
number of evaluation criteria that provide a fair and consistent review of streets and communities, while
defining and prioritizing the individual streets and/or communities that are most in need of traffic calming
from a traffic safety perspective.
In February 2018, Council approved report INS-18-003Traffic Calming Priority -2018in which staff
recommended that a traffic calming review be conducted for Patricia Avenue.
REPORT:
In February 2018, Transportation Services conducted a survey regardingthe initiation ofa traffic calming
review for Patricia Avenue. Thissurveymet the minimumrequired threshold and as a result staff
proceededwith a Public Information Centre(PIC), held in May 2018. The intent of this PIC was to discuss
the traffic calming review process, the current traffic conditions of the roadway, and potential traffic
calming measures.AsecondPIC was held in November 2018after receiving feedback from residents
through the first PICand developing a preliminary preferred design;which included a speed hump
between Sandra Avenue and Jack Avenue and a raised trail crossing at the Henry Strum Greenway with
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3 - 1
an incorporatedLevel 2 Type D pedestrian crossover. The intent of the second PIC was to review
resident feedback,present the preferred design option as determined by the traffic calming steering
committee,and answer questions and comments raised by residents.No changes were made to the
preliminary preferred design after PIC 2 due to general support of the plan by the affected residents.
Affected agencies werealsocontactedand citedno concerns regarding the proposed traffic calming
plan.
In January 2019, Transportation Services staff mailed a final survey to all affected area residents along
Patricia Avenue. The intent of the survey was to determine if there is sufficient support for the
implementation of the recommended traffic calming measures. As per the City of Kitchener Traffic
Calming policy, a minimum of 50% of directly affected residents must respond to the survey and 60% of
the respondents must support the recommended plan for staff to recommend installation of the proposed
measures.
There were a total of 52propertiessurveyed within the boundaries of the study area. The results of this
survey are as follows:
Residents in favour of the recommended plan:15(75%of 20votes)
Residents opposed to the recommended plan: 5(25%of 20votes)
Total 20responded out of 52(39%)
Although the minimum participation rate was not achieved, there is strong support to implement the
proposed traffic calming measures amongst those who responded to the survey. Additionally only 2
measures are being proposed, one of which is being recommended to enhance the overall trail user
experience. Based on the indicated support, TransportationServices recommends that the proposed
traffic calming plan be implemented. The recommended changes would ultimately create a safer
environment for roadand trialusers, while not impactingon-street parking.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Priority:3: Safe and Thriving Neighbourhoods.
Strategy:3:2 Create safer streets in our neighbourhoods through new traffic
calming approaches.
Strategic Action:NB39 Traffic Calming
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The total cost of implementing the traffic calming plan is approximately $40,000 andwill be taken from
Transportation Services Traffic Calming capital budget account.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM Directly affected residents of the Patricia Avenuetraffic calming review have received
information regarding this review since February 2018.Notification of both Public Information Centres
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3 - 2
was provided through mail out and road signage. Information packages were distributed at both PICs
which highlighted key topics discussed and included questionnaires for feedback. Presentation materials,
conclusion of each PIC.
CONSULT Patricia Avenue traffic calming review began withan initiation survey in February 2018. Two
(2) Public Information Centres were held to gain input at key stages of the traffic calming review process,
including feedback on the proposed preferred solution. In January 2019, Transportation Services staff
mailed a final survey to all affected residents along Patricia Avenue and the surrounding neighbourhood
to determine support for the preferred plan.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager of Development Services,
DevelopmentServicesDepartment
Attached:
Appendix A Traffic Calming Plan
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3 - 3
Appendix A: Traffic Calming Plan
Patricia Avenue Victoria Street S. to Highland Road W.
1
2
1)Speed hump at 8 Sandra Avenue, between Jack Avenue and Sandra Avenue.
2)Raised crosswalk at the trail crossing between Metzloff Avenue and Highland Road West,
supplemented by a Level 2 Type D pedestrian crossover.
Study Area
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3 - 4
Speed Hump Measure 1
Raised Crosswalk Measure 2
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3 - 5
REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
th
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Barry Cronkite, Director,Transportation Services
519-741-2200 ext. 7738
PREPARED BY:Eric Bentzen-Bilkvist, Traffic Technologist, (519) 741-2200 x7372
WARD (S) INVOLVED:Ward 4
th
DATE OF REPORT:March 25, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-070
SUBJECT:CaryndaleDriveTraffic CalmingReview
_______________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That aroadway narrowing beinstalled onCaryndale Drive between Robertson Crescent and
Chapel Hill Drive;
That a roadway narrowing be installed on Caryndale Driveat Chapel Hill Drive;
That the roadway narrowing at Chapel Hill Drive be raised once the extensions of Robert Ferrie
Drive and Strasburg Drive are fully complete;
That atraffic circle be installed at the intersection of Caryndale Driveand Hearthway Street /
Evenstone Avenue, and further;
That the Uniform Traffic By-Law be amended accordingly.
BACKGROUND:
Traffic volume and speeding are significant safety related issues frequently raised by residents of affected
neighbourhoods in the City of Kitchener. In response to these issues, Council reviewed, updated and
Traffic CalmingPolicy in 2014 and established an annual budget to
address traffic management issues in residential neighbourhoods. The traffic calming policy outlines a
number of evaluation criteria that provide a fair and consistent review of streets and communities, while
defining and prioritizing the individual streets and/or communities that are most in need of traffic calming
from a traffic safety perspective.
In February 2018, Council approved report INS-18-003Traffic Calming Priority -2018in which staff
recommended that a traffic calming review be conducted for Caryndale Drive.
REPORT:
In February 2018, Transportation Services conducted a survey regardingthe initiation of atraffic calming
review for CaryndaleDrive. This survey met the minimum required threshold and as a result staff
proceeded with a Public Information Centre(PIC),held in May 2018. The intent of this PIC was to discuss
the traffic calming review process, the current traffic conditions of the roadway, and potential traffic
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
4 - 1
calming measures.AsecondPIC was held in November 2018after receiving feedback from residents
through the first PICand developing a preliminary preferred design; which included roadway narrowings
between Robertson Crescent and Chapel Hill Drive and at the intersection of Caryndale Drive and Chapel
Hill Drive, a raised crosswalk at the intersection of Carydale Drive and Chapel Hill Drive and a traffic
circle installed at the intersection of Caryndale Drive and Hearthway Street/Evenstone Avenue. The intent
of the second PIC was to review the summarized resident feedback, present the preferred design option
as determined by the traffic calming steering committeeand answer questions and comments raised by
residents.No changes were made to the preliminary preferred design after PIC 2 due to general support
of the plan by the affected residents.
Through consultation with affected agencies, Kitchener Fire noted that they had concerns with the timing
of the installation of the raised narrowing. Asa result staff are recommending that the raised portion of
the measure be delayed until after the extensionsof Robert Ferrie Drive and Strasburg roadare complete,
allowing an alternate fire emergency route into the neighbourhood.
In January 2019, Transportation Services staff mailed a final survey to all affected area residents along
CaryndaleDrive. The intent of the survey was to determine if there is sufficient support for the
implementation of the recommended traffic calming measures. As per the City of Kitchener Traffic
Calming policy, a minimum of 50% of directly affected residents must respond to the survey and 60% of
the respondents must support the recommended plan for staff to recommend installation of the proposed
measures.
There were a totalof 42propertiessurveyed within the boundaries of the study area. The results of this
survey are as follows:
Residents in favour of the recommended plan:15(68%of 22votes)
Residents opposed to the recommended plan: 7(32%of 22votes)
Total 22responded out of 42(52%)
Based on the results above, the Caryndale DriveTraffic Calming review has met the required minimum
community support and response rate.
As indicated by the results, the majority of respondents are in favour of implementing the traffic calming
measures. As a result, Transportation Services recommends that the preferred traffic calming plan be
implemented. The recommended changes willultimately create a saferenvironment for all road users;
however it will result in the loss of approximately4on-street parkingspaces in the immediate vicinity of
the traffic calming measures.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Priority:3: Safe and Thriving Neighbourhoods.
Strategy:3:2 Create safer streets in our neighbourhoods through new traffic
calming approaches.
Strategic Action:NB39 Traffic Calming
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
4 - 2
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The total cost of implementing the traffic calming plan is approximately $45,000 andwill be taken from
Transportation Services Traffic Calming capital budget account.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM Directly affected residents of the CaryndaleDrivetraffic calming review have received
information regarding this review since February 2018.Notification of both Public Information Centres
was provided through mail out and road signage. Information packages were distributed at both PICs
which highlighted key topics discussed and included questionnaires for feedback. Presentation materials,
conclusion of each PIC.
CONSULT CaryndaleDrivetraffic calming review began withan initiation survey in February 2018.
Two (2) Public Information Centres were held to gain input at key stages of the traffic calming review
process, including feedback on the proposed preferred solution. In January 2019, Transportation
Services staff mailed a final survey to all affected residents along Caryndale Driveand the surrounding
neighbourhood to determine support for the preferred plan.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman,General Manager of Development Services,
DevelopmentServicesDepartment
Attached:
Appendix A Traffic Calming Plan
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
4 - 3
Appendix A: Traffic Calming Plan
Caryndale DriveBiehn Driveto Stauffer Drive
1
2
3
1)A mid-block road narrowing located at 24 Caryndale Drive between Robertson Crescent
and Chapel Hill Drive.
2)An intersection narrowing at Caryndale Drive and Chapel Hill Drive to be become a raised
narrowing once the Robert Ferrie Drive and Strasburg Drive extensions are fully complete.
3)Traffic Circle located at the intersection of Caryndale Drive and Hearthway Street /
Evenstone Avenue.
Study Area
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
4 - 4
Roadway Narrowing Measure 1
Raised Narrowing Measure 2
Traffic Circle Measure 3
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
4 - 5
REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
th
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Barry Cronkite, Director, Transportation Services,
519-741-2200 ext. 7738
PREPARED BY:Eric Bentzen-Bilkvist, Traffic Technologist, (519) 741-2200 x7372
WARD (S) INVOLVED:Ward 2
th
DATE OF REPORT:March 25, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-073
SUBJECT:Old Chicopee DriveTraffic CalmingReview
_______________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That anintersection narrowing be installedat the eastern leg of the intersection of Conway Drive
and Old Chicopee Drive;
That aroadway narrowing beinstalledto the immediate east of the intersection of Boundbrook
Court and Old Chicopee Drive, and further; thatthe sidewalk on the south side of Old Chicopee
Drivebe extended by 10m,to provide a safer crossing area for pedestrians;
That aroadway narrowingbe installed at the eastern leg of the intersection of Huntingdale Drive
and Old Chicopee Drive;
That aspeed hump be installedat the Dom Cardillo trail crossing, between Bancroft Street and
Daimler Drive, and further;
That the Uniform Traffic By-Law be amended accordingly.
BACKGROUND:
Traffic volume and speeding are significant safety related issues frequently raised by residents of affected
neighbourhoods in the City of Kitchener. In response to these issuesCouncil reviewed, updated and
Traffic Calming Policy in 2014 and established an annual budget to
address traffic management issues in residential neighbourhoods. The traffic calming policy outlines a
number of evaluation criteria that provide a fair and consistent review of streets and communities, while
defining and prioritizing the individual streets and/or communities that are most in need of traffic calming
from a traffic safety perspective.
In February 2018, Council approved report INS-18-003Traffic Calming Priority -2018in which staff
recommended that a traffic calming review be conducted forOld Chicopee Drive.
REPORT:
In February 2018, Transportation Services conducted a survey re:theinitiation of atraffic calming review
for Old Chicopee Drive. Thissurvey met the minimum required threshold and as a result staff proceeded
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 forassistance.
5 - 1
with a Public Information Centre(PIC),held in May 2018. The intent of this PIC was to discuss the traffic
calming review process, the current traffic conditions of the roadway, and potential traffic calming
measures.AsecondPIC was held in February 2019after receiving feedback from residents through the
first PICand developing a preliminary preferred design; which included narrowingsat the intersections
of Conway Drive and Old Chicopee Drive, and Boundbrook Court and Old Chicopee Drive, and a speed
hump at the Dom Cardillo Trail. . The intent of the second PIC was to reviewresident feedback,present
the preferred design option as determined by the traffic calming steering committee,and answer any
questions and comments raised by residents.The final proposed plan was amended and now includes
an intersection narrowing at the intersection of Huntingdale Drive and Old Chicopee Drive inaddition to
the aforementioned previous measures due to resident feedback received at the second PIC.
Affected agenises were contacted, Grand River Transit and Kitchener Fire have no concerns regarding
the proposed traffic calming plan.
In March2019,Transportation Services staff mailed a final survey to all affected area residents along
Old Chicopee Drive. The intent of the survey was to determine if there is sufficient support for the
implementation of the recommended traffic calming measures. As perthe City of Kitchener Traffic
Calming policy, a minimum of 50% of directly affected residents must respond to the survey and 60% of
the respondents must support the recommended plan for staff to recommend installation of the proposed
measures.
There werea total of 447propertiessurveyed within the boundaries of the study area. The results of this
survey are as follows:
Old Chicopee DriveParticipation Summary(Indirectly Affected Homes)
In favour of installing the proposed traffic calming measures:50 (59.5%)
Opposed to installing the proposed traffic calming measures:34 (40.5%)
TOTAL responsesreceived,of 447 surveyedinside the study area:85 (19%)
To account for the large survey distribution, a separate analysis was done specifically for houses with
frontage on Old Chicopee Drive. The following numbers are included in the overall results provided
above, but summarized below to demonstrate input received from residents more directly impacted by
traffic on Old Chicopee Drive, given close proximity and direct access.
Old Chicopee DriveParticipation Summary(Directly Affected Homes)
In favour of installing the proposed traffic calming measures:23 (79%)
Opposed to installing the proposed traffic calming measures:6 (21%)
TOTAL responsesreceived,of 80surveyedon Old Chicopee Drive:29 (36%)
Although the minimum participation rate was not achieved, there is strong support to implement the
proposed traffic calming measures amongst those who are directly affected. Based on the indicated
support, Transportation Services recommends that the proposed traffic calming plan be implemented.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
5 - 2
The recommended changes willultimately create a safer environment for road and trailusers, however
it will result in the loss of approximately ten (10) on street-parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the
traffic calming measures.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Priority:3: Safe and Thriving Neighbourhoods.
Strategy:3:2 Create safer streets in our neighbourhoods through new traffic
calming approaches.
Strategic Action:NB39 Traffic Calming
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The total cost of implementing the traffic calming plan is approximately $40,000 andwill be taken from
Transportation Services Traffic Calming capital budget account.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM Directly affected residents of the Old Chicopee Drivetraffic calming review have received
information regarding this review since February 2018.Notification of both Public Information Centres
was provided through mail out and road signage. Information packages were distributed at both PICs
which highlighted key topics discussed and included questionnaires for feedback. Presentation materials,
conclusion ofeach PIC.
CONSULT Old ChicopeeDrive traffic calming review began withan initiation survey in February 2018.
Two (2) Public Information Centres were held to gain input at key stages of the traffic calming review
process, including feedback on the proposed preferred solution. In March2019, Transportation Services
staff mailed a final survey to all affected residents along Old Chicopee Drive and the surrounding
neighbourhood to determine support for the preferred plan.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman,General Manager of Development Services,
DevelopmentServicesDepartment
Attached:
Appendix A Traffic Calming Plan
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
5 - 3
Appendix A: Traffic Calming Plan
Old Chicopee Drive Ottawa Street North to River Road East
1
2
Study Area
3
4
1)An intersection narrowing be installedat the eastern leg of the intersection of Conway Drive and
Old Chicopee Drive.
2)A narrowing be installedto the immediate east of the intersection of Boundbrook Court and Old
Chicopee Drive. And further, that the sidewalk on the south side of Old Chicopee Drivebe
extended by 10m.
3)A narrowing be installed at the eastern leg of the intersection of Huntingdale Drive and Old
Chicopee Drive.
4)A speed hump located at the Dom Cardillo trail crossing, betweenBancroft Street and Daimler
Drive.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
5 - 4
Roadway Narrowing Measures 1, 2 and 3
Speed Hump Measure 4
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
5 - 5
REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Kim Kugler,Director of Sport, Community Services519-741-2200 x 7544
PREPARED BY:Kim Kugler,Director of Sport, Community Services519-741-2200 x 7544
WARD (S) INVOLVED:All Wards
DATE OF REPORT:2019-03-28
REPORT NO.:CSD-19-009
SUBJECT:LicenceAgreementUnifor Baseball Diamonds,600 Wabanaki Drive,
Kitchener
__________________________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
Thatthe Deputy CAO or designate be delegated authority to execute a licence agreement
withUnifor and Union Building Corporation of Canadafortheuseof two (2) baseball
diamonds located at 600 Wabanaki Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, said agreement tobe to the
satisfaction of the City Solicitor,and;
Thatthe Deputy CAO or designate be delegated authority to execute two(2)one(1)year
renewalsfor the licence agreement.
BACKGROUND:
To address the gap between demand and availability of baseball diamond inventoryin 2018the
City entered into agreement with the owneron April 12,2018,to access the two(2)baseball
diamonds at 600 Wabanaki Drive in Kitchener. Council authorized this short-termagreement on
April 9, 2018.The agreement expired on September 30, 2018,and staff would like to enter into a
further licence agreement for the use of the ball diamonds.
The relationship between the owner and operator of the Unifor baseball diamonds and the City
was amicable. Both parties have an interest in maintaining the relationship.
REPORT:
To ensure the City can meet the demand for baseball diamond inventory in 2019, the City is
preparing to enter into a mutually agreeable licencewith Unifor and Union Building Corporationfor
access to two (2) baseball diamonds. The licence agreement will establish responsibilities of both
Unifor and the City.The term of the licence will be one (1)year,with two(2),one(1) year options
to renew.
***This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994for assistance.
6 - 1
Unifor has agreed to provide full access to the site including two (2) baseball diamonds, parking
lots, and any other outdoor associated amenities in exchange for the City maintaining the
diamonds and outdoor groundsfrom April to October.
The City will be responsible for all outdoor maintenance costs from late April until October annually.
These costs will offset from revenues collected by the city from diamond users.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The recommendation of this report sup
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There will be no financial implications to the City as the revenue from the diamond users are
sufficient to offset the cost.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Michael May, General Manager, Community Services
6 - 2
6 - 3
REPORT TO:Community & Infrastructure ServicesCommittee
th
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Claire Bennett, Corporate Sustainability Officer, ext. 7322
PREPARED BY:Claire Bennett, Corporate Sustainability Officer, ext. 7322
WARD (S) INVOLVED:All
th
DATE OF REPORT:March 27, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-094
SUBJECT:Corporate Climate Action Plan
_________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Climate Action Plan be endorsed,in principle, subject to action
items beingapproved through future budgetdeliberationsand business plans; and,
Thatstaff be directed to complete a 3-year monitoring program on the Corporate
Climate Action Plan, to assessthe 8% absolute greenhouse gasemission (GHG) target,
with possible consideration for establishing a greater GHGreduction target; and,
That the City of Kitchener update the corporate green building design from LEED-Gold
2
for new City buildings greater than 500mto an energy intensity-based target of 25%
energy improvement above Ontario Building Code Regulation 388/18 or Net Zero
Ready/Net Zero energy,where site conditions allow; and further
That apermanentfull-time equivalent(FTE)position be approved to support the
Corporate Sustainability Office.
BACKGROUND:
On April 23, 2014, Council directed staff to prepare a terms of reference for an integrated
climate action plan for the City of Kitchener that would address corporate mitigation and
adaptation strategies, and report back to Council.
On Nov. 16, 2015 (CAO-15-024), Council approved theCorporate Climate Action Plan
(CorCAP) terms of reference following
Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program framework for climate mitigation, andto
consider followingthe Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) Building Adaptive and
Resilient Communities (BARC) milestone framework for climate adaption. Through the
development of thisplan the following objectives were to be included:
1.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
7 - 1
2.Mitigation and adaptation goals for the next 10 years, including a corporate greenhouse
gas (GHG) reduction target for the City of Kitchener;
3.
Action goals, including existing and new measures to be implemented;
4.A detailed implementation plan that includes: estimated costs, funding sources,
responsibilities, and timelines; and
5.A plan for monitoring the implementation status of mitigation and adaptation actions and
Progress towards the corporate emissions reduction target.
On February 13, 2017 (CAO-17-004), Council approved an 8% absolute greenhouse gas
reduction targetthat, endorsed following theICLEI framework, and establisheda Corporate
Climate Action Plan steering committee to guide the development of the Corporate Climate
Action Plan as outlined within this report.Through the establishment of a target the City
competed milestone 2 of the Partners for Climate Protection framework.
For additional context, On March 3, 2008 (CRPS08-014) Finance & Corporate Services
Committee endorsed a recommendation through report CRPS-08-014 to design all new city
2
buildings and additions over 500 mto meet Leadership in Environmental and Energy Design
(LEED) Silver, which was further amended to LEED Gold at Council on March 17, 2008.
The Corporate Climate Action Plan forms the reduction target and actions to be taken to
and improve
resiliency to climate change impacts. Separately,and in partnership with Climate Action
Waterloo Region (ClimateActionWR), an action plan is being developed to achieve the
levels by 2050. Ultimately these local level plans work towards provincial, federal and global
climate goals. Specifically, these plans are aligned to achieve the Paris Climate Conference
°C
(COP21) agreement to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5above pre-industrial
levels.
Throughthe2019federal budget $350 million has been announced for municipalsustainability
initiativesandan increase of $1.01 bil;the
provincial government announceda$30 Billion Infrastructure Funding Program, which includes
agreensteam. The funding requires municipalities to make commitments to climate action
through setting targets and creating plans. The CorCAP positions the City of Kitchener well to
apply for projects through sustainability funding streams.
REPORT:
The Corporate Climate Action Plan
actions through to 2026 to deliver on the 8 percent GHG reduction target council endorsed in
2017. A high level summary of CorCAPis attached as appendix Awith the full report available
7 - 2
here. Following council endorsement aconciseand accessible version of the plan will be
uploaded t
The CorCAP contains three main sections: Part One Action Plan (mitigation and adaptation);
Part Two Program Development and Implementation; and, Part Three Plan Review.
Endorsement of the CorCAP achieves milestone 3of the PCP and ICLEI frameworks.
Part One Action Plan
This section of the plan outlines the tangible actions and corresponding implementation plan
relating to mitigation (reducing greenhouse gas emissions from City operations) and
adaptation (creating resiliency to the effects of a changing climate in City owned infrastructure
and operations).The plan is specific and technical so that the GHG reduction goal can be
realisedand subject matter experts at the City of Kitchener have clearly articulated actions,
which align with capital replacement programs within the fourmajor greenhouse gas
contributing areas:buildingsand pumping stations;fleet;outdoor lighting;and waste.
Part Two Program Development and Implementation
This section establishes
goals. Ultimately, it comprises the structure of the operational program for the Sustainability
Office, including goals to help strengthen and develop measurement systems, process tools,
andcommunication strategies.
Part Three Plan Review
The plan review sectionoutlines a formal iterative process of reporting and review of CorCAP,
which includes tracking progress, reporting and assessment, revision and future action
planning. Given the challenges and opportunities of climate action, it is important that action
plans be a long term, living document with ongoing stakeholder consultation and reporting.In
addition, the Environmental committee passed a recommendation to review the absolute
reduction
plan progresses.
CorCAP Goals
Within the three parts of the plan there are eight overarching goals. They are:
1.Maximize facility-level efficiency and resilience.
2.Opt
electrification.
3.Upgrade and standardize outdoor lighting to LED technology with controls for further
efficiencies, analytics and functionality.
4.Complete a comprehensive review of the existing waste program to improve and
expand service areas.
7 - 3
5.Plan and implement climate adaptation initiatives through engagement, policy and
projects that improve resiliency to impacts that pose risk to the corporation.
6.Generate and manage robust climate data to analyze, forecast, and report on findings
and trends to inform strategic planning, business operations and project level
performance.
7.Guide decision making to support greenhouse gas emission reduction and resiliency to
climate change.
8.Improveengagement and two-way communication between corporate stakeholders by
optimizingexisting channels and creatingnew ones.
Within these overarching goals there are a series of specific actions. A significant amount of
work has gone in to aligning these actions with other work programs to ensure that they can be
delivered within the 2026 planning horizon, to maximize implementation efficiency and
greenhouse gas emission reductions, and to maximize returns on investments.
Building Design Targets
The Cityof Kitchener previously adopted LEED Gold targets for expansions and new building
construction over 500 square metres. At the time, LEED was an appropriate certification body
to ensure sustainability considerations were incorporated into site selection andbuilding
design. The global understanding of climate change and its impacts have since evolved and
further identified the linkage with energy intensity and greenhouse gas emissions. This means
that LEED is not the most appropriate certification tool whenlooking at reducing energy
intensity and greenhouse gas emissions.
As the City of Kitchener grows and adds additional building footprints it will be increasingly
challengedto achieve an absolute greenhouse gas reduction target while expanding city
facilities through LEED certificationalone. In fact, there is significant cost associated with the
certificationprocess and this funding could be better invested into energy efficiency
improvements. Investments in building envelope improvements to achieve aminimum of 25
percent energy improvement above Ontario Building Code Regulation 388/18or Net Zero
Ready/Net Zero energy, where site conditions allow,is recommended to supportsoft service
growth while working towards overall GHG emission reductions.
Staffing Requirements
Funding was set aside in the 2019 budget for a staffing resource to support the Corporate
Sustainability Officeportfolio,with consideration of a permanent hire deferred to the timing of
the CorCAP being presented for approval.Thereis a significant body of work required to
sustainability objectivesandwork planning is underway through a
partnership with ClimateActionWRto achieve the community GHG reduction target.
The primary focus of the Corporate Sustainability Officer was intended to be on strategic
planning, policy, program and partnership development as well as project management
including applying to funding bodies and applicable reportingon corporate and community
7 - 4
progress.However, this position has been spending significant time on background data
collection and outreach opportunities.
The new permanentposition wouldprimarily focus oncity staff and community facing
sustainability based engagement related to:market-based incentivesfor private landowners to
engage in stormwater management controls;engagement of city fleetusersto reduce fuel
consumption and behaviour related operating expenses; city staff and community related
sustainability behaviouraroundfacility use and wastemanagement. Some estimates indicate
that approximately 60 percent of consumption activities can be impacted from behaviour
change alone. In addition, this role will coordinateand generatekey climate-related data
required for mandated and voluntary reporting.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Priority:Sustainable Environment & Infrastructure
Strategy:#4.3 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and consumption in all areas of city
operations
Strategic Action:# SE4 Corporate ClimateAction Plan
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There areno funding requestsfor this programat this time. Council allocated reserve funding
as part of the 2019 budget processto begin implementation of CorCAPprojects in 2019 and
2020. Any specific capital funding asks beyond those that can be funded through the reserve
fund will be sought through future budget deliberations and business plans.
Ongoing funding for the FTE identified within this report is available through sustainability
operating budgets.
Capital investments into sustainability initiatives ultimately reduce energy consumptionand
ongoing operating costs. As an example,a net zero facility produces as much energy as it
consumes over its lifespan and does not have ongoing utility consumption billsgenerating
operating savings.In addition, mechanical system requirements for heating and cooling are
much smaller for net zero facilities reducing capital replacement budget requirements since
these ty
As stated previously, $350 million was included in the 2019 federal budget for municipalities
regarding sustainability initiatives.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
7 - 5
INFORM -with the agenda in advance of the
council/committee meeting
CONSULT Extensive consultation has occurred with staff through a variety of engagement
sessions, including information sharing at events, site tours, workshops, and working with staff
oneachaction item to develop alignmentwith other work programs. The CorCAP Steering
committee was consulted with via meetings and email throughout the plan development.In
addition,there was a series of online engagement tactics (webpage, polls,and blog posts).
Community consultation efforts includedthe Compass Kitchener survey, the budget
engagement process and the Leisure Facilities Master Plan consultation.
st
Further, the CorCAP was presented to the Environmental Committee March 21with the
committee endorsing the following recommendation:
That staff be directed to complete a 3-year monitoring program on the Corporate
Climate Action Plan, to asses GHG emissions and reductions, with possible
consideration for establishinga new GHG target; and further,
COLLABORATE Through the consultationprocess, input and recommendations made by
stakeholders were included in the development of the plan
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER:
CRPS-08-014:Implementation ofGreen Building Design and Construction Standards.
CAO-15-024: City of Kitchener Corporate Climate Action Plan Terms of Referencewas
approved.
CAO-17-004: City of Kitchener Corporate Climate Action Plan Phase 1Report,
establishment of 8 percent absolute GHG reduction target and participation in
Change, Changing Communities framework.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager,Development Services
Attachments: Appendix ASummary of the Corporate Climate Action Plan
7 - 6
Appendix A:Summary of the Corporate Climate Action Plan
The widespread scale and complexity of climate change poses considerable environmental,
economic and social risk to cities. The City of Kitchener understands and acknowledges its
role as a vital participant in the global action to combat climate change. Leadership from the
City of Kitchener in its corporate operations to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsand build
resilient infrastructurewill helpto ensure long-term vibrancy for the local community.
City of Kitcforthe Corporate Climate Action Plan (CorCAP)is to lead by
example with action on climate changetoreduce corporate greenhouse gas emissions,
promote inclusive environmental sustainability and resilience.
Global agreements set the stage for federal level adaptation and mitigation responses, which
drives provincial planning,legislationand local level action. At a community-level, climate
planning is being coordinated by Climate Action Waterloo Region with involvement from the
Region of Waterloo, City of Kitchener and other local municipalities. The Corporate Climate
climate.
Global to local policies guiding climate action
Climate action planning in local governmentin Canadais guided by the Federation of
framework for
climate mitigation andLocal Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) Building Adaptive and
Resilient Communities (BARC) milestone frameworkfor mitigation. Endorsement of theCity of
KitchenerMilestone 3in both frameworks.
7 - 7
Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions is a major focus of the CorCAP.A greenhouse gas
inventory and climate change risk and vulnerability assessment was completedin previous
phases of workto understand the current and projected state of the organization. In 2017
Councilestablished the
action planemissions as 2016 and an 8% GHG reduction by 2026. The following table shows
baseline emissions, the 2026 GHG target and business as usual assuming population growth
of 1.8% per year.
Focus 2016 GHG2026 BAU Reduction% ReductionReduction
22
AreatCOeGHGForecasttCOeFrom 2016Share
2
tCOe
Buildings58385,36069404788%38%
Pumping 13413015343%> 1%
Stations
Fleet3,5843,30043582848%18%
Lighting50537558113026%30%
Waste33621039612638%13%
TOTAL10,3979,37512,4281,0228%100%
The following information outlines the eight major goals of CorCAP as well as specific actions
within each goal.
Mitigation (reducing greenhouse gas emissions in city operations)
Buildings and Pumping Stations
Goal: Maximize facility-level efficiency and resilience.
Actions:
Complete replacements and retrofits for inefficient
and/or end of life equipment and embed controls and automation
(sensors, dimmers).
Optimize operations and maintenance program: scheduling, recommissioning,
preventative maintenance.
During new capital construction process design buildings for energy intensity-based
target of 25% energy improvement above Ontario Regulation 388/18 made under the
7 - 8
Building Code Act, 1992 or Net Zero Ready/Net Zero energy where site conditions
allow.
During major renovations, complete deep energy retrofits.
Fleet
Goal:
alternative fuels and electrification.
Actions:
Integrate alternative fuels and anti-idling technology.
Electrify fleet vehicles and equipment where feasible.
Optimize fleet through right-sizing, downsizing, vehicle sharing/scheduling, and driver
behavior (anti-idling, acceleration and route optimization).
Outdoor Lighting
Goal: Upgrade and standardize outdoor lighting to LED technology
with controls for further efficiencies, analytics and functionality.
Actions:
Continue LED retrofits, with controls where possible, on
decorative, underpass, and walkway/park lighting.
Identify additional ways to conserve energy through actions such as reducing excess
lighting and motion activated lighting where possible.
Waste
Goal: Complete a comprehensive review of the existing waste
program to improve and expand service areas.
Actions:
Undertake a sanitation review to understand stakeholders,
procedures, challenges and opportunities within procurement, design and operations,
withkey goals of:
o Expanding organics program,
o Divert and/or reuse materials, such as fallen trees, aggregate, metal, wood, e-
waste, plastic, underground piping,
o Expanding services/streams downtown and parks / trails, where feasible, and
o Process improvements and stakeholder engagement.
Increase diversion at events through additional waste streams, engagement campaigns,
vendor engagement, and contractor services.
Develop a downtown diversion program through partnerships.
Develop asustainable procurement program.
7 - 9
Develop a green office program (ie. paper reduction (double sided, softcopy storage
and minimize hardcopy requirements).
Adaptation (creating resiliency in City operations from a changing
climate)
Studies on local climate change impacts predict that there will be
more extreme precipitation events that result in severe flooding,
more frequent extreme wind and freezing rain events and increasing
temperatures, extreme heat events and extended periods of low
summer precipitation leading to drought-like conditions.
Goal: Plan and implement climate adaptation initiatives through engagement, policy and
projects that improve resiliency to impacts that pose risk to the corporation.
A series of actions have been identified inbroad areas related to risk planning, capital
planning, design and construction, and operation.
Program Development & Implementation Goals
Goal:Create and utilize robust climate data to gather, analyze,
forecast, and report on findings and trends to inform strategic
planning, business operations and project level performance.
Goal:Guidedecision making to support greenhouse gas emission
reduction and resiliency to climate change.
Goal: Improve engagement and two-way communication between stakeholders by optimizing
existing channels and creating new ones.
A series of actions have been identified in a comprehensive areas related to data gathering,
finance, budgeting, procurement, project management, operations and communications.
Plan Review
program and Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) Building Adaptive and Resilient
Communities (BARC) milestone frameworks require a continuous improvement cycle of
tracking progress, reportingand updating the plan to achieve milestones 4 and 5. This will be
built into CorCAP as the City works toward achieving its current and any future amended
targets.
7 - 10
REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Niall Lobley, Director, Parks & Cemeteries, 519-741-2600 ext. 4518
PREPARED BY:Niall Lobley and David Schmitt
WARD (S) INVOLVED:All
DATE OF REPORT:March 12, 2019
REPORT NO.:INS-19-008
SUBJECT:Approval of Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy (2019 2028) &
Implementation Plan
__________________________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
ThatSustainable Urban Forest Strategy (2019-2028), attached as Appendix A
to INS-19-008be approvedasengaging,
That the Implementation Plan, for the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy, contained within
this report bereceived;and
Consideration of the recommendationshereinbe referred to the departmental business
planning process and future budget processes.
That staff be directed to provide a grant of up to $40,000 a year as approved in the 2019
budget, to REEP Green Solutions to deliver a subsidised tree planting program in 2019,
2020 and 2021
BACKGROUND:
Direction to develop
consideration comes from the 2015-2018 Strategic Plan for Kitchener. Within the Strategic
Priority Sustainable Environment and Infrastructure, strategy, 4.1 identifies the need to
manage and enhance the urban forest so that it continues to make a long-term contribution to
the livability of Kitchener, and the strategic action, SE06, requests that a sustainable urban forest
management program for public and private lands be developed.
With this direction staff developed in the winter of 2017 a Background Document Developing
a Sustainable Urban Forest Program, a tree canopy report based on 2014 GIS imagery and an
urban forest story map allowing residents to discover their urban forest in their neighbourhood.
***This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994for assistance.
8 - 1
www.kitchener.ca/trees
urban forest.
This background work identified key principles, listed below, that have strongly influenced the
development of the strategy.
1
1)The urban forest includes all trees on publicand private lands
2)The community plays a key role in maintaining and enhancing the urban forest,
particularly on private lands, where asignificant proportionof the urban forest isfound.
3)Trees and the larger urban forest provide significant economic, environmental and
social benefits to the community.
4)A sustainable urban forest maximizes benefits while minimizing the associated costs
and risk. In contrast to traditional corporate assets trees provide their greatest benefits
during their latter stages of life.
Using thisinformation and after an extensive community engagement process (see community
engagement section for details) staff developed:
current reactive program a fair condition (for the full report see resources
www.kitchener.ca/trees).The report card provides a benchmark for where we are today,
and allows us to measure our progress going forward.
Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy (Draft)
In May 2018, Council received the draft Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy, identified near-term
implementation priorities to guide the 2019 budget process, and launched the final stage of
public engagement on thecontents of the strategy.
REPORT:
This report is intended to:
1.Present the final version of the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy; and,
2.Outline
1
Public lands includes parks, open spaces, streets, boulevards, cemeteries, golf courses, community centres, along trail
systems and in our natural and forested areas. The City is the largest single land owner of the Urban Forest in Kitchener, but
the majority of the Urban Forest is owned by multiple private landowners and homeowners, The Urban Forest on private
lands includes trees in front and rear yards, in fields and developer owned land parcels, around schools and businesses.
8 - 2
The Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy (SUFS) provides the community vision for a sustainable
urban forest as well as a framework (Plan, Engage, Protect, Maintain, Plant) for what actions
are required to achieve asustainable urban forest.
Using the principles of a sustainable urban forest program and the results of the community
engagement process, this strategy presents:
visionand goalfor a sustainable urban forest,
The five branches of a sustainable urban forest, and
Fifteen actions that the city and community can work collaboratively on to move towards
a sustainable urban forest.
Public Engagement onthe development of the strategy was extensive and is outlined in the
Community Engagementsection of this report. Largely positive feedback on the draft SUFS
was obtained through an Engage Kitchener survey, which has informed the final draft.
Appendix A provides the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy.
Implementing the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy: Priorities & Actions
The strategy presents a long-term vision and comprehensive list of actions that can be
undertaken to develop a sustainable urban forest. Recognizing that it will take timeand
resourcesto implement the SUFS,staff recommend that an iterative approach to implementation
isadopted whereby the plan is implemented in 5-year implementation stages. At each stage,
staff will review and report on key performance indicators, successes and challenges.
At the May 7, 2018 Strategic Council Session, Council endorsed five implementation priorities
for the SUFS to guide the 2019 budget processand near-term actions. These priorities are:
1.Address areas of risk
2.Address key gaps
3.Improve customer service
4.Continue work that will support tree planting on private lands
5.Protect Trees
Table 1 provides a summary of actions that are underway, require minimal financial support or
were approved through the 2019 budget and represent quick winsto advance the City in
achieving a sustainable urban forest.
8 - 3
Table 1:CurrentActions
SUFS ActionWhat we are doingInitiation
Timing
Plan for a Sustainable 2019+
Establishing the forestry operational model
Forest
required to implement the SUFS
Identify & Remove at Risk
Developing risk and inspection toolsand
Trees
address areas of high risk as identified
through the inspection process
Establish a tree canopy target based on
updated GIS imagery
Work with the Community 2019-2021
Pilot program with REEP Green Solutions
to develop a non profit tree
to support tree planting and maintenance
planting and stewardship
on private property to be launched in April
program
this year as an initial 3 year pilot
Increase Tree Planting
Activities
Improve Customer 2019+
Engaging an Operations Technologist,
Service
Forestry tohelp respond tomore than 1500
customer querieseach yearand manage
service requests
Develop service levels
Develop a tree planting and 2019-2022
Developing an enhanced tree planting
soils management plan for
program to address thecurrentbacklog
City Lands
(2018) of City treereplacement
Increase Tree Planting
Activities
Embrace Love My Hood2019+
Delivering a pilot tree planting programin
Increase Tree Planting
Cityparksas part of LMH Greening
Activities
initiative
Non Bold Text indicates action taken directly from Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy
submissions
5-Year Implementation Strategy
quick w
the priorities established by Councilandrespond to community feedback. In addition, staff
have identified actions that align to other corporateinitiativessuch as the Customer Service
Strategy, the Corporate Climate Action Plan, and Love My Hood in an effort to support multiple
community and corporate goals.
8 - 4
Table 2 provides a summary of SUFS actions that are recommended for implementation in the
first 5-year implementation periodto sustain and build on quick wins in table 1, as well as
address other priorities identified in the SUFS.
Table 2: Five-Year Implementation Actions(2020 2024)
SUFS ActionWhat we would like to doFinancial
Impact
Increased tree $$$
Address ongoing tree backlog and work
planting to achieve Capital and
towardsachievinga defined canopy cover
a defined canopy Operational
targetBudget
Implement a $$$
Implement routine inspection to meet
Proactive Capital and
established service levels
Management Operational
Under take an initial pilot(2020)on a
Program for City Budget
structuralpruning program to inform future
owned trees
costs.
Develop operational capacity to address tree
management issues proactively through
routine inspection and management, and
meeting defined service levels
Conserve and $
Explore options for enhanced conservation
Protect the Urban Capital
and protection of the urban forest on private
Forest
lands
Develop a $
Complete natural area management plan
sustainable natural Capital Budget
area management
plan
Create an $
Develop an emergency response plan that will
Emergency Operational
allow us to respond effectively and efficiently
Response PlanBudget
to emergency events impacting the urban
forest
Community Pilots$
Review community pilots (REEP and Love My
Capital Budget
Hood) in 2020 and 2021 and, if successful,
integrate them into our Forest Management
Program
Plan for a $$
Realign ongoing capital program elements into
Sustainable ForestOperational
a sustainable operating program (e.g. existing
Budget
staff resources; tree planting program; etc.)
$ = Less than $50,000 a year
$$ = $50,000 -$150,000 a year
$$$ = More than $150,000 a year
8 - 5
As noted above, it is staffs recommendation that the ongoing implementation of the SUFS be
seen as iterative, with regular reports back to Council on achievements and progress, and that
these be used to define next steps and inform budget direction in subsequent years.
Staff will use the implementation plan to help inform the annual budget process and Council will
have an opportunity to approve budget requests associated with the implementation plan.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Priority:Sustainable Environment and Infrastructure
Strategy:4.1Manage and enhance the urban forest so that it will continue to make a long-
term contribution to the livability of Kitchener
Strategic Action:SE06 Sustainable Urban Forest Management Program
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
At this time there are no financial implications. The attached strategy and implementation plan
will be used to inform future budget processes.
Staff will be seeking to build operational sustainability into future budget cycles aligned with
these priorities. This will include staff seeking additional FTE staff to support ongoing
implementation.
Through the budget process, and business planning process, Council will be provided options
around level of investment to deliver on the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy; these options
will impact the extent and speed with which implementation is achieved.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
g important to the
community.
maintaining and enhancing the urban forest a comprehensive and successful community
engagement process was akey objectives of this project.
Residents were informed
website, social media, newspaper articles,radiointerviews,phone calls, direct mailings,
emails,bookmarks, posters, colouring sheets, along with attending meetings/eventsand
.
8 - 6
During the summer and fall of 2017, staff connected and consultedwith more than 1,800
citizens by attending:
Special events(e.g. Cherry Park Festival),
Neighbourhood meetings,
City events (e.g. Kitchener Market, Bikefest, Earth Day),
Citizen committees, along with holding,
Council /Mayor interviews,
Public tree walks/talks(60+ people),
Two community workshopsattended by 72 residents , and an
Engage survey(78 respondents)
Out of this first phase of engagement five key themes, which have been incorporated into the
strategy(pg. 11-12), emergedand are listed below:
1)Recognize the value of trees
2)Sustain our existing urban forest
3)Grow the urban forest
4)Communicate and provide information
5)Involve neighbourhoods
th
In the spring of 2018 (May 7) staff attended a Strategic Council Session (INS-18-025) to
present council with the draft sustainable urban forest strategy, seek their input and launch the
public review of the draft strategy. Staff also attendedthe Environmental Committee, and Safe
andHealthy Community Advisory Committee.
Through a second Engage survey residents providedtheir commentson the draft strategy
from May to June 2018. During those eight weeks, 116 residents provided comments. Overall
there was strong support for the draft strategy and proposed actions.A full list of all of the
comments received can be viewed in Appendix B of this report.
In addition, previously engaged stakeholders were informed that this report was being
advance of the council/committee meeting.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Denise McGoldrick,General Manager, Infrastructure Services
8 - 7
REPORT TO:Community and Infrastructure Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING:April 15, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Gloria MacNeil, Director of By-law Enforcement
(519-741-2200. ext. 7952)
PREPARED BY:Gloria MacNeil, Director of By-law Enforcement
(519-741-2200. ext. 7952)
WARD (S) INVOLVED:ALL
DATE OF REPORT:April 1, 2019
REPORT NO.:CSD-19-008
SUBJECT:ADMINISTRATIVE MONETARY PENALTY SYSTEM (AMPS)
___________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff be directed to proceed with the implementation of an Administrative Monetary
Penalty System (AMPS) as set out in report CSD-19-008;
That, in order to support the implementation of an AMPS program, the following by-laws
be approved to come into effect as of June 3, 2019;
a)Parking Administrative Penalty By-law (CSD-19-008, Schedule A)
b)Screening and Hearing Officer By-law (CSD-19-008, Schedule B)
Thata by-law be approved to amend the following existing by-lawsto allow for the
implementation of an AMPS program which will comeinto effect as of June 3, 2019, (CSD-
19-008, Schedule C):
a)By-law 2007-138 Traffic and Parking By-law
b)By-law 2010-190 Parked on Private Property By-law
c)By-law 88-171 Fire Route By-law
d)By-law 2008-117 Disabled Parking By-law
e)By-law 88-169 Municipal Off Street Parking By-law
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Parking tickets issued in the City of Kitchenerare currently issued, processed and adjudicated
pursuant to the Provincial Offences Act(POA), and are heard in the Ontario Court of Justice
(Provincial Offences Court). The Actprescribes the process, and as a result, under this
regime there is limited opportunity for a municipality to provide a revised process that may be
more flexible and suit the nature of the municipality.
***This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994for assistance.
9 - 1
Staff are proposing that the City transition the adjudication of parking tickets away from the
traditional court system to an Administrative Monetary Penalty System (AMPS) as provided for
in the Municipal Act, 2001.Staff are of the opinion that there are several key benefits of this
transition with the key focus on making the legal process more efficient, and the customer
experience morefriendly, convenientand less intimidating. Further, there will be a positive
impact on the Regional court system in terms of making court resources available for more
serious matters. An AMPS program will provide for the same open, transparent and objective
process for adjudicating parking tickets as is currently in place with the POA system,
maintaining the fundamental principles of open court and due process.
The City of Kitchenerhas partnered with the City of Waterloo to jointly develop and implement
this program. This partnership has allowed for several shared efficiencies as part of the
development process and will continue to provide further efficiencies as the program unfolds.
already put in place in several municipalities across Ontario.
There are essentially two (2) elements involved in the parking ticket administration and
enforcement. The first being the ticket issuance and the second being the processing and
adjudication of the ticket once it has been issued. Under an AMPS program, the issuing of
tickets basically remains the same. The key improvement involves the way the ticket is
adjudicated after being issued and is discussed in more detail further in this report.
The following is an overview of how the proposed AMPS programwould function:
1.The process to issue a parking ticket, now to be known as a penalty notice, remains
essentially the same;
2.When a person wishes to dispute a penalty notice that he/she receives, they can attend
the By-law Enforcement Office (BEO), at any time during normal business hours, and
request to speak with a Screening Officer to conduct a screening meeting;
3.By-law Enforcement staff will all be appointed as Screening Officers and will have the
authority to conduct screening meetings.
4.The AMPS program provides staff with an increased level of discretion to attempt to
resolve the penalty notice. This may include the potential to reduce the fine or provide
for a payment program, if appropriate. Under the current POA process, the only option
to resolve a parking ticket is to pay it or request a trial and attempt to resolve the matter
at Court on the trial date;
5.If the person is not satisfied with the outcome of the screening meeting, they can
request a hearing. In simple terms, this would be like requesting a trial under the
9 - 2
current process, however the new hearings process is significantly less formal and more
timely;
6.A Hearings Officer(s) will be appointed by Council, and will adjudicate matters at a
t of City staff and Council;
7.City staff will provide administrative support for the hearings process;
8.Hearings would take place in the Council Chambers at City Hall and would be attended
by City staff and administrative support staff. The issuing By-law Enforcement Officer
would not be required to attend;
9.As in the current POA process, a penalty notice that remains unpaid, whether it goes
through the full adjudication process or not, would eventually be sent to MTO and be
applied to the license plate of the subject vehicle;
The following is a brief overview of the benefitsof AMPS:
1.The program provides enhanced customer service, and is less formal and less
intimidating for the public to manoeuvre through, as compared to the Provincial
Offences Court process;
2.Removing parking tickets from the court process will allow the Regional Court
Administration to reallocate court time and resources, to address other
pressures;
3.The AMPS program reduces the amount of Officer time that is spent in court and
will allow staff more time to be on the road and available to respond to customer
concerns
4.Staff will have increased flexibility and discretion to attempt to resolve parking
ticket disputes in the early stages of the process through the screening process,
which will be available by attending the By-law office during normal business
s added resolution tools are aimed to increase early resolution
decisions and reduce the need for the public to incur added costs and/or time
commitments;
5.The AMPS program will provide for less formal hearings at City Hall (governed by
the rules under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and the Policies to be
established in accordance with the Regulation).
6.
dependent upon the Court schedules at the Regional Courthouse. With the
current volume of parking tickets, under the current system, the wait time for a
Court date could be as much as 8 to 9 months after the ticket is issued. Under
the AMPS program, staff are anticipating for a significantly reduced wait time of
approximately2-3 months. It is hoped that this will also reduce the impact on
administrative resources, when tickets are resolved sooner.
9 - 3
7.There is the potential to experience a larger portion of the fees associated with
late or defaulted fines to help offset administration and enforcement costs.
Current late fees are shared between the City, the Region and the Province.
This item will be discussed in more detail later in this report;
8.There is also the potential to mitigate officer and citizen safety concerns relating
to certain enforcement issues, such as parking enforcement in school zones,
while still holding people accountable. The current POA system requires that a
parking ticket be placed on the vehicle or served on the person at the time of the
offence.There are times when this requirement can result in safety concerns,
particularly when the driver of the vehicle leaves the area quickly, sometimes
making contact with the Officer. The AMPS program can provide for a ticket to
be mailed to theregisteredowner of the vehicleafter the fact.
To implement AMPS, the City will need to enact an AMPS By-law that provides for the
administrative process, replacing the current POA process. In addition, a by-law is required to
-laws to provide for the penalty provisions to refer to the
AMPS process, as opposed to the current POA process. Further, a third by-law willbe
required to put the process in place forthe appointment of screening officers and hearings
officers.
Finally,
which will inform and guide the process going forward. These policies are currently being
developed by staff and will be presented to Council in May.
BACKGROUND:
Parking tickets issued in the City of Kitchenerare currently issued, processed and adjudicated
pursuant to the Provincial Offences Act(POA), and are heard in the Ontario Court of Justice
(Provincial Offences Court). That Actprescribes the process, and as a result, under this
regime there is limited opportunity for a municipality to provide a revised process that may be
more flexible and suit the nature of the municipality.
In 2007, changes were made to the Municipal Actto allow municipalities to develop an AMPS
programto process and adjudicate parking violations. Subsequent amendments to the
Municipal Act, 2001 extended the authority to establish an AMPS program to include
accessible parking by-laws (which were previouslyexcluded), as well as other types of
municipal by-laws. O. Reg. 333/07 (the Regulation) sets out specific requirements that must be
met in order to establish an AMPS program for parking.
9 - 4
In essence, an AMPS program replaces the prescribed process in the Provincial Offences Act,
and can be designed to meet the needs of the municipality, provided the parameters of the
provincial regulations are met.
The Regulation requires a municipality establishing an AMPS program for parking to pass an
AMPS By-law, which designates the parking by-laws and provisions to which AMPS will apply,
and establishes the adjudication process. The POA will no longer apply to the designated
parking by-laws/provisions, once the AMPS program is implemented. In its place will be an
adjudication process that is designed to be more flexible, efficient and expedient.
In accordance with the Regulation, the proposed AMPS process would provide for resolution of
a dispute at a screening review. If the screening decision is contested, the individual can then
request a hearing. In its place will be an adjudication process that is designed to be more
flexible, efficient and expedient.
An AMPS program will provide for the same open, transparent and objective process as is
currently in place with thePOA system, maintaining the fundamental principles of open court
and due process.
Several municipalities across Ontario (ie. Vaughan, Oshawa, Burlington, Markham, Hamilton,
Brampton, Mississauga, Toronto, Niagara Falls, Richmond Hill, Oakville) have implemented
AMPS programs and all feedback received indicates that their processes are running with
increased efficiency and in a cost effective manner.
AMPS has been identified on By--19 Business Plan, staff have been
actively researching and developing an AMPSprogram for the past 18 months.
Kitchener has partnered with the City of Waterloo to develop this AMPS initiative which is
proposed for both municipalities. Research and development resources have been shared to
date andthe plan going forward is to share resources whenever possible. Beyond Legal and
Municipal Enforcement staff from Kitchener and Waterloo, the project has also involved staff
input from Legislated Services, Technology and Innovative Services, Finance and
Communications from both cities. Susan Smith, City of Waterloo Legal Services, is the project
lead and both municipalities have contributed to the funding of her role. The Directors of
Municipal Enforcement Services with the two (2) cities serve as the Steering group.
Although AMPS can involve a variety of municipal by-law violations, staff are proposing to
commence the AMPS program with parking violations, which represents the single largest
volume of Court activity for both Waterloo and Kitchener. This is consistent with the approach
of many other municipalities. It is anticipated that other City by-laws will transition into the
AMPS program in the future.
9 - 5
REPORT:
The following is an overview of how the proposed AMPS program would function:
1.The process to issue a parking ticket, now to be known as a penalty notice, remains
essentially the same;
2.When a person wishes to dispute a penalty notice that he/she receives, they can attend
the By-law Enforcement Office (BEO), at any time during normalbusiness hours, and
request to speak with a Screening Officer to conduct a screening meeting;
3.By-law Enforcement staff will all be appointed as Screening Officers and will have the
authority to conduct screening meetings.
4.The AMPS program provides staffwith an increased level of discretion to attempt to
resolve the penalty notice. This may include the potential to reduce the fine or provide
for a payment program, if appropriate. Under the current POA process, the only option
to resolve a parking ticket is to pay it or request a trial and attempt to resolve the matter
at Court on the trial date;
5.If the person is not satisfied with the outcome of the screening meeting, they can
request a hearing. In simple terms, this would be like requesting a trial under the
current process, however the new hearings process is significantly less formal and more
timely;
6.A Hearings Officer(s) will be appointed by Council, and will adjudicate matters at a
nd Council;
7.City staff will provide administrative support for the hearings process;
8.Hearings would take place in the Council Chambers at City Hall and would be attended
by City staff and administrative support staff. The issuing By-law Enforcement Officer
would not be required to attend;
9.As in the current POA process, a penalty notice that remains unpaid, whether it goes
through the full adjudication process or not, would eventually be sent to MTO and be
applied to the license plate of the subject vehicle;
Attached as Schedule is a simplified flowchart to summarize how a penalty notice (parking
ticket) can proceed through the AMPS process.
The following is a brief overview of the benefits of AMPS:
1.The program provides enhanced customer service, and is less formal and less
intimidating for the public to manoeuvre through, as compared to the Provincial
Offences Court process;
9 - 6
2.Removing parking tickets from the court process will allow the Regional Court
Administration to reallocate court time andresources, to address other pressures;
3.The AMPS program reduces the amount of Officer time that is spent in court and will
allow staff more time to be on the road and available to respond to customer concerns
4.Staff will have increased flexibility and discretion to attempt to resolve parking ticket
disputes in the early stages of the process through the screening process, which will be
available by attending the By-
resolution tools are aimed to increaseearly resolution decisions and reduce the need
for the public to incur added costs and/or time commitments;
5.The AMPS program will provide for less formal hearings at City Hall (governed by the
rules under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and the Policies to be established in
accordance with the Regulation).
6.
dependent upon the Court schedules at the Regional Courthouse. With the current
volume of parking tickets, under the current system, the wait time for a Court date could
be as much as 8 to 9 months after the ticket is issued. Under the AMPS program, staff
are anticipating for a significantly reduced wait time of approximately 2-3 months. It is
hoped that this will also reduce the impact on administrative resources, when tickets are
resolved sooner.
7.There is the potential to experience a larger portion of the fees associated with late or
defaulted fines to help offset administration and enforcement costs. Current late fees
are shared between the City, the Region and the Province. This item will be discussed
in more detail later in this report;
8.There is also the potential to mitigate officer and citizen safety concerns relating to
certain enforcement issues, such as parking enforcement in school zones, while still
holding people accountable. The current POA system requires that a parking ticket be
placed on the vehicle or served on the person at the time of the offence. There are
times when this requirement can result insafety concerns, particularly when the driver
of the vehicle leaves the area quickly, sometimes making contact with the Officer. The
AMPS program can provide for a ticket to be mailed to the register owner of the vehicle
after the fact.
Enactment of AMPS By-law
The legislation requires that, as the integral part of implementing an AMPS process, a
municipality must enact a comprehensive by-law that prescribes the various elements of the
adjudication process, from the issuance of the ticket to itsresolution. In essence, this by-law
replaces the administrative processes as are currently prescribed by the POA. Attached as
Schedule Ais a draft AMPS By-The By-law is based on the
9 - 7
requirements established in the provincial Regulation. The key components of the proposed
by-law include the following:
-Designated the parking by-laws/provisions that will be subject to the AMPS process and
sets out the penalties for each offence;
-Provides for the issuance of a penaltynotice (formally known as a parking ticket);
-Establishes the chronological steps in the penalty notice/dispute process, in accordance
with the Regulation, including where a person does and does not respond accordingly
to the receipt of a penalty notice being issued;
-Creates and defines the screening review process;
-Creates and defines the hearing review process;
-Establishes how documents are to be served to affected persons;
-Establishes the timelines applicable for a person to respond to a penalty notice;
-Establishes the timelines for when late fees may be applied, in accordance with the
Regulation, in circumstances where a person has failed to respond to the penalty notice
within the prescribed timeframe;
-Prescribes the timeline for sending a penalty notice that remains unresolved, after all
avenues for resolution have been made available, to the MTO for inclusion in the
Defaulted Fines process.
-Delegatedauthority to the Director to prescribe forms, notices, including Penalty Notice,
guidelines, processes and procedures, necessary to implement the By-law and the
administrative penalty system, ant to amend them from time to time as the Director
deems necessary.
Amendment to Existing Parking By-laws
There are several by-laws within the City that contain parking violations. These by-laws will
need to be amended to identify that the parking provisions contained therein willno longer be
subject to the Provincial Offences Act,but will be governed by the AMPS process. These
include:
-Traffic and Parking By-law #2007-138;
-Fire Route By-law #88-171;
-Municipal Off-Street ParkingLots By-law#88-169
-Disabled Persons Parking By-law #2008-117;
-Parked on Private Property By-law #2010-190; and
-law Schedule Cto amend the remaining
five(5)parking by-laws as referenced above. The amendment is essentially the same for
each by-law and provides for the AMPS adjudication process to replace the existing penalty
provisions, prescribed by the POA. All other elements of each by-law remain the same and
will be enforced as is currently done.
9 - 8
Enactment of Screening and Hearing Officer By-law
The Regulation requires that any AMPS system must include a formalized two step resolution
process for anyone wishing to dispute and resolve a parking violation. These two steps are
A By-law to establish the position of screening officer
and hearing officer, and to provide for appointment of individuals as screening/hearing officers
is required.
Step #1: Screening Process
The screening process will involve the penalty notice recipient attending at the By-law
Enforcement office, during normal business hours to request to speak to a screening
officer regarding the ticket. Existing administrative staff within the By-law Enforcement
Division, along with the Director and Supervisors, will be appointed as screening
officers.The screening officer will discuss the circumstances regarding the ticket with
the person and provide his/her decision on how to resolve the ticket. There will be more
options available to staff to facilitate resolution of the ticket. If the recipient holder is
satisfied with the decision, the matter is considered resolved once he/she has paid any
penalty amount that forms part of the resolution. Conversely, if the ticket holder is not
satisfied with the Decision, he/she can request a hearing.
Step #2: Hearing Process
Once a request for a hearing is received, staff will process the request, assign a hearing
date and inform the requestor.The hearings will take place in meeting rooms at
Kitchener CityHall and WaterlooCity Hall. At this time, staff anticipate there to be two
hearing dates set each month, onein each city. While a City of Kitchenerticket holder
is likely to be given a hearing date in Kitcheneras the first option, he/she may be
provided a date in Waterloo, if it makes sense to do so. Equally, Waterlooticket holders
may attend a hearinginKitchenerif it makes sense to do so.
Ahearing is presided over by a Hearings Officer. This person will be appointed by
Council, upon the recommendation of staff, and must not be a person who is currently
employed by the municipality. The City will be represented in the hearing by a staff
person who has knowledge of the ticket being disputed. After hearing comments by
both sides, the Hearing Officer will render a decision that, once rendered, will be final
and binding. If there is a monetary penalty owed by the ticket holder, the matter is not
considered resolved until such time as the penalty amount is paid in full.
As required by the provincial Regulation,staff have developed a draft Screening and
Hearing Officer By-B.The By-law
provides for the appointment of Screening and Hearing Officers, and sets out restrictions
on who can qualify for these positions, in order to ensure the integrity of the process.
9 - 9
It is recommended that the appointment of screening officers be delegated to staff.
However, Council would appoint the Hearing Officer(s). Staff are developing a supporting
policy relating to the appointment of screening and hearing officers, which will come for
consideration in May 2019.
AMPS Policies
In addition to the requirement for an AMPSby-law and revisions to existing parking by-laws, O.
Municipal Act, 2001, requires that a
municipality shall develop standards relating to the administration of the system of
administrative penalties which shall include:
(a)Policies and procedures to prevent political interferencein the administration of the
system;
(b)Guidelines to define what constitutes a conflict of interestin relation to the
administration of the system, to prevent such conflict of interest and to redress such
conflicts should they occur;
(c)Policies and procedures regarding financial management and reporting; and
(d)Procedures for the filing and processing of complaints made by the publicwith
respect to the administration of the system
The Regulation further requires that procedures must be established:
i.to allow a person to obtain an extension of time in which to request a review
by a screening officer, or a review by a hearing officer, on such grounds as may
be specified in the administrative penalty by-law.
ii.to permit persons to obtain an extension of time for payment of the penaltyon
such conditions as may be specified in the administrative penalty by-law.
These procedures must provide for a suspension of the enforcement mechanisms available in
the Regulation, in relation to the administrative penalty if an extension of time has been
granted. The proposedAMPS By-law provides the grounds upon which an extension of time
may be granted and delegates authority to the Director of By-lawEnforcement to establish the
necessary procedures.
In addition, the Regulation requires that procedures must be established to permit persons to
be excused from paying all or part of the administrative penalty, including any administrative
fees, if requiring them to do so would cause undue hardship.
The following policies require Council for approval as part of the AMPS program:
9 - 10
a)Policy to Prevent Political Interference
b)Conflict of Interest Policy
c)Policy Regarding Financial Management and Reporting
d)Public Complaints Policy AMPS
e)Undue Hardship Policy
f)Policy for the Appointment of Screening and Hearing Officers
a)Policy to Prevent Political Interference:to ensure that the AMPS system is conducted in
a fair and independent manner, and to prevent political interference in the administration
of AMPS
b)Conflict of Interest Policy: to set out requirements relating to Screening Officers,
Hearing Officers and City staff in order to prevent actual, potential and perceived
conflicts of interest in relation to AMPS
c)Policy Regarding Financial Management and Reporting: to provide a policy regarding
financial management and the reporting and tracking of administrative penalties and
fees in relation to AMPS
d)Public Complaints Policy AMPS: to provide a process for public complaints regarding
the administration of AMPS
e)Undue Hardship Policy: to provide guidelines to Screening Officers and HearingOfficers
is exercising their discretion in accordance with the By-law to cancel, reduce or extend
time for payment of Administrative Penalties and Administrative Fees in order to reduce
undue hardship
f)Policy for the Appointment of Screening and Hearing Officers: to set out the
appointment of certain staff positions as Screening Officers, and to detail the process
relating to recruitment of Hearing Officers, including establishment of a joint panel (City
of Kitchener and City of Waterloo) to review applications. Staff propose to initiate the
recruitment of Hearing Officers with a posting immediately following Council approval of
the AMPS By-law. The detailed recruitment process will be set out in the Policy, and will
be in place for the purpose of reviewing and evaluating applications received.
These policies are currently under development and review by staff (Legislated Services, Legal
Services and By-law Enforcement) and will be presented to Council for consideration in early
May.
9 - 11
Next Steps Timeline and Implementation
The following is a high level overview of the next steps in the implementation plan:
th
1.Finalize all AMPS related policies and present to Council for consideration May 13;
2.Work with the Communications Division to finalize the communications plan for rollout of
the program;
3.Begin the recruitment process for Hearing Officer(s) immediately following Council
approval of the AMPS by-law and present recommendations for appointments to
Council June;
4.Undertake required training for all affected parties (staff, screening officers, hearing
officers, and private property enforcement officers);
5.Finalize all revisions to existing forms (tickets, reminder notices, etc.);
rd
6.Go live with the program and penalty notice issuance June 3, 2019(tickets issued
before this date will continue through the POA system until resolution);
7.Further updates to Council on the implementation of the program will be provided, as
necessary.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The recommendation
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The implementation of an AMPs program does not significantly alter our current processes
with respect to how parking tickets(now penalty notices)are issued or how many are issued.
Statistics relating to ticket violations and the resulting fine revenue can fluctuate slightly from
year to year, depending on circumstances, weather, special initiatives, etc., and it is
anticipated that this trend will continue.
Staff do not foresee any significant increase or decrease in the total number of tickets/notices
issued, as a result of the implementation of the AMPSprogram. The factors that influence
annual ticket activity currently, will continue to do so going forward.
There are some foreseeable new expense items related to the AMPS program that include one
time costs and ongoing costs. The one time costs are:
Redesign of parking tickets -$10,000
Computer/printer and telephone for the screening office -$4,000
By-law office renovation tocreate a screening office -$175,000 plus HST.
This will be funded from the tax capital reserve and paid back overtime from
the revenues generated by the program
9 - 12
The new ongoing expense item relates to the required compensation for Hearings Officers,
(third party contractors) to adjudicate parking hearings. It is anticipated that such hearings
would take place approximately once per month in Kitchener. As a result, staff are forecasting
a new expense of between $6,000 to $8,000, annuallyper City.
As mentioned, the implementation of the AMPSprogram is not likely to significantly alter the
annual ticket issuance rates and the resulting revenue from the face value of the tickets.
However, staff believe that there will be an increase in parking fine revenue as it relates to the
collection of late fees, imposed where someone fails to fulfill their obligations to respond
appropriately to resolve their ticket. This can include theplate denial fees that are placed on a
license plate renewal if the parking ticket is forwarded to the Ministry of Transportation as part
of their Plate Denial program.
The current system under the POA, provides for late fees to be applied where a person fails to
respond to their ticket appropriately, as well as plate denial fees. Under the currentsystem, as
prescribed by provincial legislation, these fees are shared between the City, the Region and
the Ministry of Transportation. Under anAMPSprogram, the City would establish the fees to
be imposed on late/defaulted penalties, and all such fees remain with the municipality. As
such, there is an anticipated increase in the revenue anticipated to result from fees relating to
late/defaulted penalties. Fees proposed are described further below.
unicipalities that have
implemented AMPSprograms.
MTO Late FeeHearing Non-Plate Denial
SearchAppearance FeeFee
Fee
Kitchener -Proposed$10$25$50$25
Oshawa$10$15$100$22
Toronto$10$25$75$25
Markham$10$25$100Unknown
Burlington$16$26$52$26
Richmond Hill$10$25$100unknown
City of Niagara Falls$15$20$50unknown
Brampton$10$15$100$22
Mississauga$10$25$100$20
Vaughan$10$50$100Unknown
Hamilton$10$25$50$22
The table indicates that the fees proposed bystaff are in line with those in place in other
municipalities. The following is a brief explanation of each fee:
-MTO search feethe City is required to pay a fee of $8.25 to the Ministry of
Transportation for every request for license plate ownership that the City sends to them.
9 - 13
The ownership request is only submitted when a person has failed to respond to their
ticket within a prescribed time. The purpose of the request is to mail out reminder
notices. Under AMPS, this fee will be charged to the City immediately for each request.
The fee would then be added to the face value of the ticket, along with a nominal
administration fee as a cost recovery exercise;
-Late Feethis fee will be added to the face value of the ticket when a person fails to
respond or to pay within the required time, after having been given time to do so and
after having received a mailed reminder noticeof the outstanding ticket. It should be
noted that the initial timeframe provided for a person to respond to the penalty notice
under AMPS will be longer(30 days) than what is provided for under the current system
(15 days)to respond to a parking ticket. This provides added opportunity for the
offender to make payment or choose a screening, without incurring any fees.
The current late fee of $16 is imposed when a person fails to respond to a parking
ticket. This amount is prescribed by legislation under the POA and has been in place for
over 20 years. The $16 fee is currently shared with the Region. This fee does not reflect
the increase in administration costs related to tracking and processing defaulted tickets,
over the years. Municipalities do nothave any discretion to adjust fees under the
currentPOA system. Staff are proposing a fee of $25, which is in line with other
municipalities, to account for increased costs over the years. Further, this fee must act
as a deterrent for failing to respond to a penalty notice and/or an incentive to respond
within the prescribed time;
-Hearing Non-Appearance FeeThis fee will be added to the face value of the penalty
in situations where an individual has requested a hearing and fails to show up. The City
will be required to cover all costs related to hearings. Therefore, if someone fails to
show up for their appointed time, theCity will incur costs related to this process and the
individual would be assessed a non-appearance fee.This fee can be considered a
carryover from the current system within the POA, as it already prescribed a non-
appearance fee;
-Plate Denial FeeThis fee will be applied in situations when a person has failed to
resolve their ticket appropriately, after all options and dispute resolution mechanisms
have been made available. The plate denial process has been in place for many years
and currently a portion of this fee has been provided to the municipality, under the POA
legislation. As such, this is areflectionof a fee under the current system.
It is important to understand the rationale for these fees being in place. When a person
fails to respond to a parking ticket issued within the appropriate time frame, there are
administrative costs associated with the municipality having to receive license plate
information, send out reminder notices, etc. These administrative costs can increase
the longer a ticket remains unresolved, up to and including sending the license plate
and related information to the Ministry for the plate denial process to be applied. These
9 - 14
costs should not be absorbed by the tax base revenue for situations where someone
has failed to respond to their obligations, after receiving a parking ticket.
For the most part, any increased revenue amount relating to fees can be attributed to
revenue reallocation whereby the City will retain a larger share of fees that are already
in place.
It is premature to specifically predict what the revenue implications will be with respect
to the redistribution of the above noted fees. In the meantime, staff are confident that
the revenue impact willadequately cover the anticipated operating costs.Upon
implementation, staff will monitor and evaluate the activity relating to late fees and
incorporate any revenue adjustments into the 2021 budget year process.
At this point staff are not anticipating a requirement for additional staff resources, as it is
the intent to implement the program with existing staff. Having said this, the AMPS
program will require some adjustments to existing staff duties. Any possible staffing
implications will be carefully considered, as the program rolls out and will be brought
forward through the budget process and funded through revenues generated. If City
Council should choose to expand the AMPS program beyond parking tickets at a later
date, there would likely be a need for additional staffing resources.
Penalty Amounts (Fines)
Under the current POA system, municipalities are required to obtain approval from the
Ministry of the Attorney General, in order to implement new or revise existing parking
fines. Under the AMPS program, this requirement is eliminated as Council will approve
any new, or revise any existing, penalty (fine), as a Schedule to the AMPS By-law.
At this time, staff are not suggesting any adjustments to the existing schedule of fines.
The parking penalties that form part of the proposed AMPS By-law (attached as
Schedule A to this report) reflect the existing set fine amounts.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
The Administrative Monetary Penalties System is an administrative process that must fit within
the Provincial regulations as set out in the Municipal Act. Staff will focus on engaging the public
to inform and educate them onthe process through a communications plan as well as
information provided on our website.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Michael May, General Manager Community Services Department &
DCAO
9 - 15
BY-LAW NUMBER2019-
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law toestablishan administrative penalty system for the
parking, standing or stopping of vehicles)
WHEREASSection 102.1 of the Municipal Act,2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended (the
Municipal Act, 2001
Kitchenerto establish an administrative penalty system requiring a person to pay an
administrative penalty for a contravention of any By-law respecting the parking, standing or
stopping of vehicles;
AND WHEREASthe purpose of the system of administrative penalties established by the
municipality shall be to assist the municipality in regulating the flow of traffic and use of land,
including highways, by promoting compliance with its by-laws respecting the parking, standing or
stopping of motor vehicles
AND WHEREASthe Council of The Corporation of the City of Kitchenerconsiders it desirable
to provide for a system of administrative penalties and administrative fees for the designated
City by-laws, or portions of the designated City by-lawsset out herein;
NOW THEREFOREthe Council of The Corporation of the City of Kitchenerenacts as follows:
1.0TITLE
1.1This By-Parking Administrative Penalty By-
2.0DEFINITIONS
2.1Where words and phrases used in this by-law are not defined herein but are defined in
the Highway Traffic Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 8, as amended from time to time or any
successor thereof (the HTA), the definitions in the HTAshall apply.
2.2In this By-law:
Administrative Fee -law, as may
be amended from time to time;
Administrative Penalty means an administrative penalty
this By-law, for a contravention of a Designated By-law;
City means The Corporation of the City of Kitchener;
Clerk means the City Clerk, or anyone designated by the City Clerk to perform hisor
her duties pursuant to this By-law;
9 - 16
2
Designated By-law means a City by-law, or a part or provision of a City by-law,to
which this Parking Administrative Penalty By-law applies, asdesignatedunder this By-
;
Director means the Director of By-lawEnforcement of the City, or anyone designated
by the Director of By-lawEnforcement to perform his or her duties pursuant to this By-
law;
Effective Date of Service means the date on which service of a Penalty Notice is
deemed to be effective in accordance with this By-law;
Hearing Decision means a notice which contains the decision ofa Hearing Officer, as
set out in Section 6.14;
Hearing Non-Appearance Fee means an Administrative Feeestablished by the City
Hearing Officer means anyperson appointed by the Cityfrom time to time pursuant to
the Screening and Hearing Officer By-law, to perform the functions of a hearing officerin
accordance with thisBy-law;
Holiday means a Saturday, Sunday and any statutory holiday in the Province of
Ontario or any day on which the offices of the City are officially closed for business;
Late Payment Fee means an Administrative Feeestablished by the City from time to
rative Penalty within the time
prescribed in this By-
MTO Search Fee means an Administrative Feeestablished by the City from time to
time for any search of the records of, or any inquiry to, the Ontario Ministry of
Transportation, or related authority, for the purposes of this By-law, as listed in Schedule
NSF Fee means a feeestablished by the Cityand amended from time to time,in
respect of any payment to the City from a Person, for which there are insufficient funds
available or the transaction is declined;
Officermeans a person appointedby the City to enforce aDesignated By-law, or a
police officer employed by the Waterloo Regional Police Service;
Ownermeans the Person whose name appears on the permit for the vehicle as
provided by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, and if the vehicle permit consists of a
vehicle portion and a plate portion and different Persons are named on each portion, the
Person whose names appears on the plate portion;
Penalty Notice means a notice as described inSection 4.0of this By-law;
Penalty Notice Date means the date of the contravention;
9 - 17
3
Penalty Notice Number means the reference number specified on the Penalty Notice
that is unique to that Penalty Notice,pursuant to Section 4.3(b)of this By-law;
Person includes an individual orcorporation, or an authorized representative thereof.
Plate Denial Fee means an Administrative Fee established by the City from time to
time,in relationto plate denial in accordance with Section 9.5 of this By-law, as listed in
;
Provincial Offences Actmeans the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O., 1990, c. P. 33, as
amended from time to time, or any successor thereof;
Regulation means O. Reg. 333/07, made under the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended
from time to time, or any successor thereof;
Screening and Hearing Officer By-law means By-law No.2019-040of the City, as
amended from time to time, or any successor thereof;
Screening Decision means anotice which contains thedecision ofa Screening Officer,
as set out in Section 5.8of this By-law;
Screening Officer means anypersonappointed by the City from time to timepursuant
to the Screening and Hearing Officer By-law,to perform the functions of a screening
officer pursuant to this By-law;and
Statutory Powers Procedure Actmeans the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O.
1990, c. S. 22, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereof
3.0APPLICATION OF THIS BY-LAW
3.1The City By-laws, or portions of City By-
By-law shall be Designated By-laws for the purposes of Section 102.1 of the Municipal
Act, 2001and paragraph 3(1)(b) of the Regulation.
3.2
wordingto be used on Penalty Notices, for the contraventions of Designated By-laws.
3.3-law sets out the Administrative Fees imposed for purposes of
this By-law.
3.4Despite any other provision of a City By-law, theProvincial Offences Actdoes not apply
to a contravention of a Designated By-law.
4.0PENALTY NOTICE
4.1If a vehicle has been left parked, standing or stopped in contravention of a Designated
By-law the Owner of the vehicle shall, upon issuance of a Penalty Noticein accordance
with this By-law, be liable to pay to the City an Administrative Penalty in the amount
y to the City any Administrative Fees
in accordance with this By-law.
9 - 18
4
4.2An Officer who has reason to believe that a Personhas contravened aDesignated By-
law may issue a Penalty Noticein accordance with this By-law.
4.3The Penalty Notice shall include the following information:
a)The Penalty NoticeDate;
b)The Penalty Notice Number;
c)The short form wordingfor the contravention;
d)The amount of the Administrative Penalty;
e)Timefor payment of the Administrative Penalty, which shall be 15calendar days
from the Effective Date of Service;
f)Information respecting the process by which the person may pay the Administrative
Penalty or request a review of the Administrative Penalty;
g)A statement advising that an Administrative Penalty will constitute a debt of the
Ownerto the City; and
h)The name and identification number of the Officer issuing the Penalty Notice
5.0REVIEW BY SCREENING OFFICER
5.1APerson who is serveda Penalty Notice may, within 30calendar days afterthe
Effective Date of Service, request, in accordance with Section 5.3,that the
Administrative Penalty be reviewed by a Screening Officer.
5.2APersonwho is served a Penalty Noticemay, in accordance with Section 5.3,request
that the Screening Officer extend the time to request a review,within 60calendar days
after the Effective Date of Service, failing which the Administrative Penalty shall be
deemed to be affirmedin accordance with Section 5.6 of this By-law.
5.3A request for areview,or for an extension of time torequest areview,shall be in the
form and manner as determined by the Directorfrom time to time, and shall include the
Penalty Notice Number and the Pcontact information. Where a request is made
by a Person who is not the Owner, the Person shall submit with the request an
authorized agent/representative form, in the form as determined by the Director from
time to time. Incomplete forms or forms notsubmitted in the form andmanner as
determined by the Directormay not be accepted or processed, at the discretion of the
Director.
5.4The Screening Officer may only extend the time to request a review of the Administrative
Penalty when the Person requesting the extension demonstrates,on a balance of
probabilities, extenuating circumstances that warrant the extension of time.The
Screening Officer will consider the request for extension before reviewing the
Administrative Penalty
9 - 19
5
5.5Where an extension of timeto request a reviewis not granted by the Screening Officer,
the Administrative Penalty and any applicable Administrative Fees shall be deemed to
beaffirmed, and shall not be subject to review.
5.6Whereneither areview nor an extension of time for review are requested in accordance
with this By-law, or where the person fails to request a review within any extended
period of time granted by the Screening Officer:
a)The person shall be deemed to have waived the right to a screening and a
hearing;
b)The Administrative Penalty, and any applicable Administrative Fees, shall be
deemed to be affirmed; and
c)The Administrative Penalty, and any applicable Administrative Fees, shall not be
subject to review.
5.7On a review of anAdministrative Penalty, the Screening Officer may affirmthe
Administrative Penalty, including any applicable Administrative Fees, or the Screening
Officer may cancel, reduce or extend the time for payment of the Administrative Penalty,
including any applicableAdministrative Fees, on the following grounds:
a)Where the Screening Officer is satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that the
vehicle was not parked, standing or stopped in contravention of the Designated
By-law asset out in the Penalty Notice; or
b)Where the Screening Officer is satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that the
cancellation, reduction or extension of the time for payment of the Administrative
Penalty, including anyapplicableAdministrative Fees, is necessary to reduce
any undue hardship; or
c)Where the Screening Officer is satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that it is
otherwise in the interests of justice to do so
5.8Every Person who has a review by the Screening Officer shall beservedwithacopy of
the Screening Decisionwithin 15 calendar days of the screening review, in accordance
with Section7.2 of this by-law.
6.0REVIEW BY HEARING OFFICER
6.1Any Person to whom a Screening Decision issued may request a review of the
Screening Decision by a Hearing Officer, in accordance with Section 6.3,within 30
calendar days afterthedate on which the Screening Decision was issued.
6.2APersonto whom a Screening Decision is issuedmay, in accordance with Section 6.3,
request that the Hearing Officer extend the time to request a review of the Screening
Decision within 60calendar days after the date on which the Screening Decision was
issued, failing which, the Screening Decision shall be deemed to be affirmedin
accordance with Section 6.6of this By-law.
9 - 20
6
6.3A request for a review by the Hearing Officer,or for an extension of time to request a
review before the Hearing Officer,shall be in the form and manner as determined by the
Director from time to time
contact information. Where a request is made by a Person who is not the Owner, the
Person shall submit with the request an authorized agent/representative form, in the
form as determined by the Director from time to time. Incomplete forms or forms not
submitted in accordance with the form andmanner as determined by the Directormay
not be accepted or processed, at the discretion of the Director.
6.4The Hearing Officer may only extend the time to request a review of the Screening
Decision where the Person requesting the extension demonstrates, on a balance of
probabilities,extenuating circumstances that warrant the extension of time.The Hearing
Officer will consider the request for extension before reviewing the Screening Decision.
6.5Where an extension of time for a hearing review is notgranted by the Hearing Officer,
the Screening Decision shall be deemed to be affirmed, and shall not be subject to
review.
6.6Where neither a hearing review nor an extension of time for a hearing review are
requested in accordance with this By-law, or where the person fails to request a hearing
review within any extended period of time granted by the Hearing Officer:
a)The person shall be deemed to have waived the right to a hearing review;
b)The Screening Decision shall be deemed to be affirmed; and
c)TheScreening Decision shall not be subject to review.
6.7APerson requesting a review by the Hearing Officer in accordance with this By-law shall
be given at least 30calendar daysnotice of the date, time and place for the review by
the Hearing Officer.The Person may request that the hearing be rescheduled by
providing a written request at least 3 business days in advance of the scheduled hearing
date, in the form and manner as determined by the Director from time to time.
6.8On a review of the Screening Decision, the Hearing Officer may affirmthe Screening
Decision, or the Hearing Officer may cancel, reduce or extend the time for payment of
the Administrative Penalty, including any applicable Administrative Fees, on the
following grounds:
a)Where theHearing Officer is satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that the
vehicle was not parked, standing or stopped in contravention of the Designated
By-law set out in the Penalty Notice; or
b)Where the Hearing Officer is satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that the
cancellation, reduction or extension of the time for payment of the Administrative
Penalty, including any Administrative Fees, is necessary to reduce any undue
hardship; or
c)Where the Hearing Officer is satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that it is
otherwise in the interests of justice to do so
9 - 21
7
6.9AHearing Officer shall not make any decision respecting a review of the Screening
Decision unless the Hearing Officer has given the person, and the City, an opportunity to
beheard.
6.10The hearing shall be subject to the Statutory Powers Procedure Act.
6.11The Hearing Officer may consider and rely on a certified statement of anOfficer,
including but not limited to, certified photographs taken by an Officer.For this purpose,
the Penalty Notice, signed by the Officer,shall constitutea certified statementof the
Officer.
6.12In addition to anything else that is admissible as evidence in accordance with the
Statutory Powers Procedure Act, the materials referred to in Section 6.11are admissible
as evidence as proof of the facts contained therein, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary.
6.13If evidence referred to in Section 6.11is being admitted at a hearing, the Hearing Officer
shall not adjourn the hearing for the purpose of having the Officer attend to give
evidence unless the Hearing Officer is satisfied that the oral evidence of the Officer is
necessary to ensure a fair hearing.
6.14ThePerson requesting the hearing shall be served with a copy of the Hearing Decision
within 15 calendar days of the hearing review.
6.15The decision of a Hearing Officer is final.
6.16Where notice has been given in accordance with this By-law, and the person fails to
appear at the time and place scheduled for a review by the Hearing Officerand has not
requested a rescheduling in accordance with the requirements of this By-law:
a)The person shall be deemed to have abandoned the hearing;
b)The Screening Decision shall be deemed to be affirmed; and
c)The person shall pay to the City a Hearing Non-Appearance Fee, in addition to
any other fees payable pursuant to this By-law
7.0SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS
7.1Service of a Penalty Notice in any of the following ways is deemed effective:
a)Affixing it to the vehicle in a conspicuous place at the time of the contravention;
b)Delivering it personally to the operator of the vehicle orthe person having care
and control of the vehicle at the time of the contravention;
c)Mailing it by regular mail to the Owner at the address as set out on theownership
as soon as reasonably practicable after the contravention; or
9 - 22
8
d)Delivering it personally to an occupant at the address of the Owner as set out on
the ownership, who appears to be at least 16 years of age,as soon as
reasonably practicable after the contravention.
7.2Service of any document other than a Penalty Notice may be made by:
a)delivering it personally to the Person who requested the screening or hearing
review, in the case of a Screening Decision or Hearing Decision; or
b)forany document, including a Screening Decision or Hearing Decision:
i)delivering it by hand to an occupant at the last known address of the Owner,
who appears to be at least 16 years of age; or
ii)delivering it by regular mail to the Ownerat thelast known address of the
Owner.
7.3For purposes of this By-law, the last known address of the Owner shall be the address
as set out on the vehicle ownership or, where an updated address has been provided in
writing by the Owner to the Parking Enforcement Office of the Cityat the time of service,
such updated address.
7.4Any Penalty Notice or document sent in writing to the Owner by regular mail,as set out
th
in this By-law,is deemed to have been served on the fifth (5) calendar day after the
date of mailing.
7.5Any Penalty Notice affixed to the vehicle to which it applies, or any Penalty Notice or
document delivered personally in accordance with this By-law, is deemed to have been
served on the date and time of such delivery.
7.6Service on a Person who is notthe Owner, in accordance with this By-law, including
service of a Screening Decision or Hearing Decision by handing it to the Person, shall be
deemed to be service on the Owner.
8.0ADMINISTRATION
8.1The Director may:
a)Designate areas within the City,and times,for conducting reviews and hearings
under this By-law;
b)Prescribe all forms,notices, including the Penalty Notice, guidelines,processes
and procedures,necessary to implement the By-lawand the administrative
penalty system, andtoamend such forms,notices, guidelines, proceduresand
processesfrom time to time as the Director deems necessary; and
c)Amend the Administrative Fees, as may be necessary to reflect changes in fees
imposed by the Province of Ontario in relation to the administration of the
administrative penalty system
9 - 23
9
9.0GENERAL PROVISIONS
9.1A Penalty Notice that is paid prior to a screening review shall be deemed as final and will
not be subject to screening, unless there is an error on the face of the Penalty Notice as
determined by the Director.
9.2Unless otherwise stated in this By-law, anAdministrative Penaltyis due and payable
within15 calendar days following the Effective Date of Service.
9.3Where an Administrative Penalty, including any Administrative Fees, is affirmed or
reduced by a Screening Officer or a Hearing Officer, the Administrative Penalty and any
Administrative Fees shall be due and payable on the date specified in the Screening
Decision or Hearing Decision, as the case may be.
9.4Wherean Administrative Penalty is not paid within 15 calendar days after it becomes
due and payable, the Owner of the vehicle in respect of which the Penalty Notice was
issued shallpay to the City an MTO Search Fee.
9.5Wherean Administrative Penalty is notpaid within 45 calendar days after it becomes
due and payable, the Owner of the vehicle in respect of which the Penalty Notice was
issued shall pay to the City, in addition to any other fees, a Late Fee.
9.6Notwithstanding Sections 9.4and 9.5, wherean Administrative Penalty is not paid within
15 calendar days after it becomes due and payable in accordance with a Hearing
Decision, the Owner of the vehicle in respect of which the Penalty Notice was issued
shall pay to the City, in addition to any other fees, an MTO Search Fee and a Late Fee.
9.7Where an Administrative Penaltyand any Administrative Fees arenot paid within 60
calendar days aftertheybecome due and payable, the City may:
a)notify the Registrar of Motor Vehicles of the default and the Registrar shall not
validate the permit of a person name in the default notice nor issue a new permit to
that person, in respect of the vehicle to which the Administrative Penalty and
Administrative Fees apply,until the penalty is paid, and the Owner of the vehicle in
respect of which the Penalty Notice was issued shall, in addition to any other fees,
pay to the City a Plate Denial Fee; and
b)pursue any other collection mechanisms available to the City pursuant to the
Regulation or at law
9.8Where a person provides a method ofpayment to the City for payment of any
Administrative Penalty or Administrative Fee, which has insufficient funds available in
the account on which the instrument was drawn,the Ownershall, in addition to any other
fees,be liable topay to the City anNSF Fee.
9.9All amounts due and payable to the City pursuant to this By-law constitute a debt to the
City owed by the Owner of the vehicle in respect of which the Penalty Notice was issued.
9.10Where a person makes arequest for an extension of time for payment, and the request
is granted, the date on which the Administrative Penalty is due and payable shall be the
date established in accordance with the extension of time, and:
9 - 24
10
a)the Penalty Notice will not be subject to the Late Payment Fee or the MTO
Search Fee, until thetime for payment has expired, and then in accordance with
the provisions herein; and
b)the enforcement mechanisms available to the City shall be suspended untilthe
extension of time has expired, and then shall apply in accordance with the
provisions herein
9.11Where an Administrative Penalty is cancelled by a Screening Officer or a Hearing
Officer, any Administrative Fee is also cancelled.
9.12Where a Personhas paid an Administrative Penalty or an Administrative Fee that is
cancelled or reduced by a Screening Officer or Hearing Officer, the City shall refund the
amount cancelled or reduced.
9.13Where the Person served with a Penalty Noticeor issued a Screening Decisionis not
the Owner, the Owner may exercise any right that such Person may exercise under this
By-law.
9.14No Officer may accept payment in respect of an Administrative Penalty or Administrative
Fee.
9.15Payments of an Administrative Penalty or Administrative Fee must be received by the
date on which they are due and payable(or any extended due date in accordance with
this By-law), and will not be credited until received by the City.
9.16Any time limit that would otherwise expire ona Holiday is extended to the next day that
is not a Holiday.
9.17Any schedule attached to this By-law forms part of this By-law.
10.0SEVERABILITY
10.1Should any provision, or any part of a provision, of this By-law, be declared invalid, or to
be of no force and effect, by a court of competent jurisdiction, it is the intent of Council
that such a provision, or part of a provision, be severed from this by-law and every other
provision of this By-law shall be applied and enforced in accordance with its terms to the
extent possible according to law.
11.0OFFENCES
11.1Any Person, including but not limited to the Owner, who:
a)makes a false, misleading or fraudulent statement in relation to a Penalty Notice,
or on any form submitted to the City in relation to a Penalty Notice; or
b)obstructs an Officer exercising any authority under this By-law,
9 - 25
11
is guilty of an offence and, upon conviction, is subject to a penalty in accordance with the
Provincial Offences Act.
11.2No Person shall attempt, directly or indirectly, to communicate with a Screening Officer
or Hearing Officer for the purpose of influencing or interfering, financially, politically or
otherwisewith, the Screening Officer or Hearing Officer respecting a Penalty Notice
and/or respecting a Power of Decision in a proceeding that is or will be pending before a
Screening Officer or Hearing Officer, except:
1.
lawyer, licensed paralegal or authorized representative; and
2.Only by that
representative during the hearing of the proceeding in which the issues
arises.
Nothing in this Section prevents a Screening Officer or a Hearing Officer from seeking or
receiving legal advice.
11.3Any Person who contravenes Section 11.2 is guilty of an offence and, upon conviction, is
subject to a penalty in accordance with the Provincial Offences Act.
12.0EFFECTIVE DATE
12.1This By-law shall come into force and effect on June 3, 2019.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchenerthis day ofApril, A.D.2019.
_____________________________________
Mayor
_____________________________________
Clerk
9 - 26
12
DESIGNATED BY-LAWS, SHORT FORM WORDINGSAND ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES
1.The provisions of each by-law listed in Column 2of the following tablesare Designated
By-laws.
2.Column 3 in the following tablessets out the short form wording to be used in a Penalty
Notice for the contravention of the designated provisionslisted in Column 2.
3.Column 4 in the following tablessets out the Administrative Penalty amount that is
payable for a contravention of the designated provision listed in Column 2for the
matter(s) identified in Column 3.
CITY OF KITCHENER TRAFFIC & PARKING BY-LAW NUMBER 2007-138, AS AMENDED
FROM TIME TO TIME OR ANY SUCCESSOR THEREOF
COLUMN 1COLUMN 2COLUMN 3COLUMN 4
ITEMDESIGNATED SHORT FORM WORDING ADMINISTRATIVE
PROVISIONPENALTY AMOUNT
1Part V 1(a)Parked in Permit Only Parking $25.00
Area Without Permit
2Part V 2(a)Parked More Than 0.15 Metres $25.00
From Curb
3Part V 2(a)Parked Facing Wrong Direction$25.00
4Part V 2(b)Parked Facing Wrong Direction $25.00
On One Way Street
5Part V 2(b)Parked More Than 0.15 Metres $25.00
From Curb On One Way Street
6Part V 2(b)Failed To Park Parallel To Curb $25.00
On One Way Street
7Part V 2(d)Parked On The Abutting $25.00
Roadway
8Part V 2(e)Parked In More Than One $25.00
Space
9Part V 3(a)(i)Parked (On/over) A Curb$25.00
10Part V 3(a)(ii)Parked (On/Over) Sidewalk$25.00
11Part V 3(a)(ii)Parked On Boulevard$25.00
12Part V 3(a)(iii)Parked In Intersection$25.00
13Part V 3(a)(iii)Parked on/over multi-use trail $25.00
14Part V 3(a)(iii)Parked Within A Roundabout$25.00
15Part V 3(a)(iv)Parked Within 3 Metres Of A $25.00
Fire Hydrant
9 - 27
13
16Part V 3(a)(v)Parked Within 15 Metres Of A $25.00
Railway Crossing
17Part V 3(a)(vi)Parked Within 9 Metres Of An $25.00
Intersection
18Part V 3(a)(viii)Parked Within 1.5 Metres Of A $25.00
Driveway
19Part V 3(a)(viii)Parked Preventing (Ingress $25.00
to/Egress From) Driveway
20Part V 3(a)(x)Parked Obstructing A $25.00
Crosswalk
21Part V 3(a)(xi)Parked Obstructing Traffic$25.00
22Part V 3(a)(xiii)Parked Longer Than 3 $20.00
Consecutive Hours
23Part V 3(a)(xiv)Parked On Highway Between $30.00
2:30 a.m. And 6:00 a.m.
24Part V 3(a)(xv)Parked For Repairing Vehicle$25.00
25Part V 3(a)(xv)Parked For Washing Vehicle$25.00
26Part V 3(a)(xv)Parked For Maintaining Vehicle$25.00
27Part V 3(a)(xvi)Parked For Soliciting $25.00
(Goods/Services)
28Part V 3(a)(xvi)Parked For Buying $25.00
(Goods/Services)
29Part V 3(a)(xvi)Parked For Selling $25.00
(Goods/Services)
30Part V 3(a)(xvi)Parked For Loading/Unloading$25.00
31Part V 3(a)(xvi)Parked To Conduct Business$25.00
32Part V 3(a)(xvii)Parked Within 15 Metres ofBus $25.00
Stop
33Part V 3(a)(xvii)Parked Within 15 Metres of $40.00
Light Rail Transit Stop
34Part V 3(a)(xxv)Parked In A Bicycle Lane$25.00
35Part V 3(a)(xviii)Parked In A Reserved Lane$25.00
36Part V 3(b)Parked On The Highway During $25.00
An Emergency
37Part V 3(a)(xix)Parked Transit Bus On $25.00
Highway
38Part V 3(a)(xx)ParkedSchool Bus On a $25.00
Highway
39Part V 3(a)(xxii)Parked A Trailer More Than 10 $25.00
Metres In Length
40Part V 3(a)(xxi)Parked Heavy Truck On $45.00
Highway
41Part V 3 (a)(xxiii)Parked Vehicle Which is $25.00
Unlicensed
42Part V 3(a)(xxiv)Parked Vehicle Which is $25.00
Leaking Fluids
43Part V 3(c)Parked In A Construction $25.00
Parking Area Without Permit
44Part V 4(a)Parked In Prohibited Area$25.00
9 - 28
14
45Part V 5Parked Over Time Limit$20.00
46Part V 6Parked Backed In At Angle$25.00
47Part V 6Parked At Wrong Angle$25.00
48Part V 7(i)Stopped In School Bus Loading $45.00
Zone
49Part V 7(ii)Stopped On Median$45.00
50Part V 7(ii)Stopped Adjacent To Median$45.00
51Part V 7(iii)Stopped Within 30 Metres Of $45.00
Bridge
52Part V 7(iii)Stopped Within 30 metres Of $45.00
Tunnel
53Part V 7(iii)Stopped Within 30 Metres Of $45.00
Underpass
54Part V 7(iv)Stopped Within A Roundabout$45.00
55Part V 8(a)Stopped In No Stopping Zone$45.00
56Part V 9Stopped InLoading Zone$45.00
57Part V 10Stopped In Taxicab Stand$45.00
58Part V 11(a)Stopped In A School Zone$80.00
59Part V 12(a)Parked (On/Over) Sidewalk $50.00
During a Special Event
60Part V 12(a)Parked On Boulevard During a $50.00
Special Event
61Part V 12(b)Parked Within 1.5 Metres Of A $50.00
Driveway During a Special
Event
62Part V 12(c)Parked Within 3 Metres Of A $50.00
Fire Hydrant During a Special
Event
63Part V 12(d)Parked In Prohibited Area $50.00
During a Special Event
64Part V 12(e)Stopped In No Stopping Zone $90.00
During a Special Event
65Part V 12(f)Parked On The Highway During $50.00
An Emergency During a
Special Event
66Part V 12(g)Parked Over Time Limit During $40.00
a Special Event
67Part V 12(h)Parked Longer Than 3 $40.00
Consecutive Hours During a
Special Event
68Part VI 1(b)Parked At Expired Meter$20.00
69Part VI (1) (a) (c) (e)Park in Parking Meter Zone $25.00
fail to pay required fee
70Part VI (1)(c)Park in Parking Meter Zone -$25.00
longer than maximum permitted
time
71Part VI 1(e)Parked Not Wholly In Parking $25.00
Space
72Part VI 4(c)Parked Taxicab In A Metered $25.00
Space
9 - 29
15
73Part V 3(d)Parked on a Highway During a $80.00
Snow Event
74Part VI 3Parked in accessible space $300.00
without permit
75Part VI 3Stopped in accessible space $300.00
without permit
BY-LAW NUMBER 88-169, BEING A BY-LAW TO REGULATE THE PARKING OR LEAVING
OF VEHICLES ON MUNICIPAL PARKING FACILITIES
COLUMN 1COLUMN 2COLUMN 3COLUMN 4
ITEMDESIGNATED SHORT FORM WORDINGADMINISTRATIVE
PROVISIONPENALTY AMOUNT
13(b)parked not whollyin parking $25.00
space
23(c)parkedin other thanparking $25.00
space
33(d)parked vehicle longer than 6.1 $25.00
metres
43(d)parked vehicle wider than 2.3 $25.00
metres
53(i)parked buying (goods)(services)$25.00
63(i)parked selling (goods)(services)$25.00
73(i)parked displaying $25.00
(goods)(services)
83(i)parked displaying vehicle for $25.00
sale
93(i)parked washing vehicle$25.00
103(i)parked maintaining vehicle$25.00
113(i)parked repairing vehicle$25.00
125(a)parked at expired meter$20.00
CITY OF KITCHENERPRIVATE PROPERTY BY-LAW NUMBER 2010-190
COLUMN 1COLUMN 2COLUMN 3COLUMN 4
ITEMDESIGNATED SHORT FORM WORDINGADMINISTRATIVE
PROVISIONPENALTY AMOUNT
1Section 3parkedon private property $25.00
2Section 4parked on private property-$25.00
municipal
9 - 30
16
3Section 5parked in an unauthorized $80.00
area
BY-LAW NO. 88-171, AS AMENDED, BEING A BY-LAW TO DESIGNATE PRIVATE
ROADWAYS AS FIRE ROUTES, AND TO PROHIBIT PARKING THEREON
COLUMN 1COLUMN 2COLUMN 3COLUMN 4
ITEMDESIGNATED SHORT FORM WORDINGADMINISTRATIVE
PROVISIONPENALTY AMOUNT
1Section 6parked onfire route$75.00
BY-LAW NUMBER 2008-117, BEING A BY-LAW TO AUTHORIZE CERTAIN ON-STREET
AND OFF-STREET PARKING OF VEHICLES FOR USE BY PERSONS WITH A
DISABILITY, AND THE ISSUING OF PERMITS IN RESPECT THEREOF
COLUMN 1COLUMN 2COLUMN 3COLUMN 4
ITEMDESIGNATED SHORT FORM WORDINGADMINISTRATIVE
PROVISIONPENALTY AMOUNT
1Section 6(park)(stop)in space$300.00
designated for disabled person
9 - 31
17
ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
ITEMFEE
Hearing Non-Appearance Fee$50
Late Payment Fee$25
MTO Search Fee$10
Plate Denial Fee$25
Harmonized
Sales Tax (H.S.T.) where applicable.
9 - 32
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-lawwithrespect tothe appointment of screening and
hearing officers)
WHEREAS Section 102.1(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001Municipal
Act, 2001
the municipality is satisfied that the person failed to comply with any by-laws respecting the
parking, standing or stopping of vehicles;
AND WHEREAS the Province has adopted O. Reg. 333/07, pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001,
which applies to administrative penalties in respect of the parking, standing or stopping of
vehicles;
AND WHEREAS in accordance with the Municipal Act, 2001, the City has passed a Parking
Administrative Penalty By-law;
AND WHEREAS in accordance with the aforesaid by-law and the Regulation, a person who
receives a Penalty Notice shall have the right to request a screening review of the administrative
penalty by a Screening Officers appointed by the City;
AND WHEREAS in accordance with the aforesaid by-law and the Regulation, a person who
receives a Screening Decision shall have the right to request a review of the decision by a Hearing
Officer appointed by the City;
ANDWHEREAS the City considers it desirable and necessary to establish the positionsof
Screening Officer and Hearing Officer,which are required for the operation of the Parking
Administrative Penalty By-law;
NOW THEREFORE The Corporation of the City of Kitchenerenacts as follows:
Title
1.This By--
Definitions
2.For the purposes of this by-law:
Administrative Penaltymeans an administrativepenalty imposed for a contravention of a
Designated By-law,as set out in the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law;
City means The Corporation of the City of Kitchener;
9 - 33
2
City Solicitor means the City Solicitor, or anyone designated by the City Solicitor to perform his
or her duties pursuant to this By-law;
Councilmeans the elected Council of the City;
Designated By-lawmeansany provision of aCity by-lawto which the Parking Administrative
Penalty By-law applies, as designated therein;
General Manager, Community Services Department/Deputy CAO means the General Manager,
Community Services Department/Deputy CAO of the City, or anyone designated by the General
manager, Community Services Department/Deputy CAO to perform his or her duties pursuant to
this By-law;
Hearing Officermeans any person appointed from time to time pursuant to this By-law, to
perform the functions of a hearing officerin accordance with this By-lawand the Parking
Administrative Penalty By-law;
Joint Panel means a panel comprised of representatives of the City of Kitchener and the City
of Waterloo, as set out in the Policy for Appointment of Screening and Hearing Officers;
Parentmeans a person who has demonstrated a settled intention to treat a child as a member
of her or his family whether or not that person is the natural parent of the child;
Parking Administrative Penalty By-law means By-law No. 2019-039of the City, as amended
from time to time, or any successor thereof;
Personincludes an individual or a corporation;
Policy for Appointment of Screeningand HearingOfficers meansa policy for the appointment
of screening and hearing officersas approved by Council,and amended from time to time, or any
successor thereof;
Power of Decision means a power or right, conferred by or under this By-law and the Parking
Administrative Penalty By-law, to make a decision deciding or prescribing the legal rights, powers,
privileges, immunities, duties or liabilities of any person:
a)In the case of a Screening Officer, in respect of a request to review an Administrative
Penalty; and
b)In the case of a Hearing Officer, in respect of areview ofa Screening Decision
Regulationmeans O. Reg. 333/07, made under the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended from time
to time, or any successor thereof;
Relativeincludes any of the following persons:
a)spouse, common-law partner, or any person with whom the person is living as a
spouse outside of marriage;
9 - 34
3
b)Parentor legal guardian;
c)child, including a step child and grandchild;
d)siblingsand children of siblings;
e)aunt, uncle, niece and nephew;
f)in-laws, including mother, father, sister, brother, daughter and son; or
g)any person who lives with the person on a permanent basis
Screening Decisionmeans a notice which contains the decision of a Screening Officer, as set
out in the ParkingAdministrative Penalty By-law;
Screening Officermeans any person appointed from time to time pursuant to this By-law, to
perform the functions of a screening officerin accordance with this By-lawand the Parking
Administrative Penalty By-law; and
Spousemeans a person to whom the person is married or with whom the person is living in a
conjugal relationship outside marriage
Screening Officer
3.The position of Screening Officer is established for the purpose of exercising the Power
of Decision in the screening review of anAdministrative Penalty, as set out in the
Parking Administrative PenaltyBy-law.
4.The Screening Officer shall have all the powers of a screening officer as set out in the
Parking Administrative PenaltyBy-lawand the Regulation.
5.Screening Officer(s)shall be appointed by theGeneral Manager, Community Services
Department/Deputy CAO,in consultation with the City Solicitor, in accordance with the
for Appointment of Screeningand HearingOfficers.
Hearing Officer
6.The position of Hearing Officer is established for the purpose of exercising the Power of
Decision in a review of a Screening Decision, as set out in the Parking Administrative
Penalty By-law.
7.The Hearing officer shall have all the powers of a hearing officer as set out in the
ParkingAdministrative Penalty By-law and the Regulation.
8.Hearing Officer(s)shall be appointed by Council on the recommendation of the Joint
Officers. Therecommendation shall give preference to an eligible candidate:
1)with good knowledge of, and experience in, administrative law; and
2)of good character
9 - 35
4
9.Hearing Officersshall be appointed for the term of Council, and thereafter until the
Hearing Officer is reappointed or a successor is appointed pursuant to this By-law or is
no longer required by the City.
10.Notwithstanding Section 9of this By-law, Council may revoke the appointment ofa
Hearing Officerat any time,on the recommendation of the Joint Panel, ifthe Hearing
Officer:
1)is found to have contravened any applicable City policy relating to the administration
of the Administrative Penalty system;
2)is found to have contravened any other requirement of the appointment; or
3)at any time during the appointment becomes ineligible for appointment
11.A Hearing Officer shall be remunerated at a rate as established by Councilfrom time to
time.
12.A Hearing Officer is deemed not to be an employee of the City, but a person who holds
an administrative position in accordance with Section 258 of the Municipal Act, 2001.
Eligibility
13.The following persons are not eligible for appointment as a Screening Officer or a
Hearing Officer:
1)A member of Council;
2)A Relative of a member of Council;
3)In the case of a Hearing Officer, an employee of the City;
4)A person indebted to the City, other than:
a)In respect of current property taxes; or
b)Pursuant to an agreement with the City, where the person is in
compliance with the terms thereof
General
14.A Screening Officer or a Hearing Officer shall have no authority to further delegate
his/her powers or duties.
15.Neither a Screening Officer nor a Hearing Officer has jurisdiction to consider questions
relating to the validity of a statute, regulation or By-law or the constitutional applicability
or operability of any statute, regulation or By-law.
9 - 36
5
16.For the purposes of subsection 23.2(4) of the Municipal Act,2001,Council has determined
that the powers delegated to the Screening Officer and the Hearing Officer are minor in
nature.
Severability
17.Should any provision, or any part of a provision, of this By-law, be declared invalid, or to
be of no force and effect, by a court of competent jurisdiction, it is the intent of Council that
such a provision, or part of a provision, be severed from this by-law and every other
provision of this By-law shall be applied and enforced in accordance with its terms to the
extent possible according to law.
18.This by-law shall come into effect on June 3, 2019.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchenerthis day ofApril, A.D.2019.
_____________________________________
Mayor
_____________________________________
Clerk
9 - 37
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-lawto amend parking by-laws with respect to
administrative penalties)
WHEREAS the City has approved By-law Number No. 2019-039, which establishes an
administrative penalty system for parking, in accordance with Section 102.1 of the Municipal Act,
2001 and O. Reg. 333/07;
AND WHEREAS the City wishes to amend By-law No. 2007-138, 88-169, 2010-190, 88-171 and
2008-117to designate certain provisions for the purposes of Section 3 of O. Reg. 333/07 as
provisions to which administrative penalties shall apply;
NOW THEREFORE The Corporation of the City of Kitchenerenacts as follows:
1.Section 1 of By-law No. 2008-117 is hereby amended by adding the following:
designated pmeans any section of this By-law designated in accordance with
Section 11(a);
Municipal Act,
2001,S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended from time to time or anysuccessor thereof;
-By-law No. 2019-039 of the City, as
amended from time to time, or any successor thereof;
2.By-law No. 2008-117 is further amended by deleting Sections 10 and 11, and replacing
them with the following new Sections 10 and 11:
10.Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of this By-law, except a
designated provision, is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a
minimum fine of $300 and a maximum penalty as provided for in the Provincial
Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c P. 33, as amended from time to time, or any
successor thereof.
11.(a)Section 6of this By-law is hereby designated for the purposes of Section 3 of O.
Reg. 333/07 as the part of this By-law to which the Parking Administrative
Penalty By-law applies.
(b)If a vehicle has been left parked, standing or stopped in contravention of a
designated provision, the owner of the vehicle shall, upon issuance of a penalty
notice in accordance with the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law, be liable to
pay an administrative penalty and any administrative fees, in accordance with the
Parking Administrative Penalty By-law
9 - 38
2
(c)The Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 33, as amended from time to
time, or any successor thereof, does not apply to a contravention of a designated
provision of this By-law.
(d)Except as set out in Sections 10 and 11(c), all provisions of this by-law and of
any other applicable legislation shall continue to apply to the designated
provisions, in addition to the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
3.Section 1 of By-law No. 88-169is amended by adding the following:
(d)(i)Designated Provisionmeans any section of this By-law designated in accordance
with Section7(b);
(f)(i)O. Reg. 333/07means Ontario Regulation 333/07, made under the Municipal
Act, 2001,S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended from time to time or any successor
thereof;
(f)(ii)Parking Administrative Penalty By-lawmeans By-law No. 2019-039 of the City,
as amended from time to time, or any successor thereof;
4.By-law No.88-169 is further amended by deleting Section 7 and replacing it with the
following new Section 7:
7.(a)Every person who contravenes any provision of this by-law, except a Designated
Provision, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to apenalty as
provided for in the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c P. 33, as amended
from time to time, or any successor thereof.
(b)Sections 3(b), (c), (d), (i) and 5(a) of this By-law arehereby designated for the
purposes of Section 3 of O. Reg. 333/07 as parts of this By-law to which the
Parking Administrative Penalty By-law applies.
(c)If a vehicle has been left parked, standing or stopped in contravention of a
Designated Provision, the owner of the vehicle shall, upon issuance of a penalty
notice in accordance with the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law, be liable to
pay an administrative penalty and any administrative fees, in accordance with the
Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
(d)The Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 33, as amended from time to
time, or any successor thereof, does not apply to a contravention of a Designated
Provision of this By-law.
(e)Except as set out in Sections 7(a) and (d), all provisions of this by-law and of any
other applicable legislation shall continue to apply to the Designated Provisions,
in addition to the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
5.Section 1 of By-law No. 88-171 is amended by adding the following:
9 - 39
3
1(1)(a) designated provisionmeans any section of this By-law designated in
accordance with Section 9(b);
1(1)(b)O. Reg. 333/07means Ontario Regulation 333/07, made under the Municipal
Act, 2001,S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended from time to time or any successor
thereof;
2(a)Parking Administrative Penalty By-lawmeans By-law No. 2019-039 of the City,
as amended from time to time, or any successor thereof;
6.By-law No. 88-171 is further amended by deleting Section 9 and replacing it with the
following new Section 9:
9. (a)Every person who contravenes any provision of this by-law, except a designated
provision, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a penalty as
provided for in the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c P. 33, as amended
from time to time, or any successor thereof.
(b)Section 6 of this By-law is hereby designated for the purposes of Section 3 of O.
Reg. 333/07 asthepart of this By-law to which the Parking Administrative
Penalty By-law applies.
(c)If a vehicle has been left parked, standing or stopped in contravention of a
designated provision, the owner of the vehicle shall, upon issuance of a penalty
notice in accordance with the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law, be liable to
pay an administrative penalty and any administrative fees, in accordance with the
Parking Administrative Penalty By-law
(d)The Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 33, as amended from time to
time, or any successor thereof, does not apply to a contravention of a designated
provision of this By-law.
(e)Except as set out in Sections 9(a) and 9(d), all provisions of this by-law and of
any other applicable legislation shall continue to apply to the designated
provisions, in addition to the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
7.Section 1 of By-law 2010-190 is hereby amended by adding the following:
Designated Provisionmeans any section of this By-law designated in accordance with
Section9(b);
O. Reg. 333/07means Ontario Regulation 333/07, made under the Municipal Act,
2001,S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended from time to time or any successor thereof;
Parking Administrative Penalty By-lawmeans By-law No. 2019-039 of the City, as
amended from time to time, or any successor thereof;
8.By-law No. 2010-190 is further amended by deleting Section 9 and replacing it with the
following new Section 9:
9 - 40
4
9. (a)Every person who contravenes any provision of this by-law, except a Designated
Provision, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a penalty as
provided for in the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c P. 33, as amended
from time to time, or any successor thereof.
(b)Sections 3, 4 and 5of this By-law arehereby designated for the purposes of
Section 3 of O. Reg. 333/07 as parts of this By-law to which the Parking
Administrative Penalty By-law applies.
(c)If a vehicle has been left parked, standing or stopped in contravention of a
Designated Provision, the owner of the vehicle shall, upon issuance of a penalty
notice in accordance with the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law, be liable to
pay an administrative penalty and any administrative fees, in accordance with the
Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
(d)The Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 33, as amended from time to
time, or any successor thereof, does not apply to a contravention of a Designated
Provision of this By-law.
(e)Except as set out in Sections 9(a) and 9(d), all provisions of this by-law and of
any other applicable legislation shall continue to apply to the Designated
Provisions, in addition to the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
9.PART II -DEFINITIONS of By-law No. 2007-138 is hereby amended by adding the
following:
Designated Provisionmeans any section of this By-law designated in accordance with
Part XXI Section 1(c);
O. Reg. 333/07means Ontario Regulation 333/07, made under the Municipal Act, 2001,
S.O. 2001, c. 25, as amended from time to time or any successor thereof;
Parking Administrative Penalty By-lawmeansBy-law No. 2019-039 of the City, as
amended from time to time, or any successor thereof;
10.By-law No. 2007-138 is further amended bydeleting Part XXI PENALTIES, Section 1,
and replacing it with the following new PART XXI PENALTIES, Section 1:
PART XXI PENALTIES
1.(a)Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of this By-law, except a
Designated Provision, is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a
penalty as provided for in the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c P. 33, as
amended from time to time, or any successor thereof.
(b)Part XXI, Section 1(a) of this By-law shall be in addition to, and shall not limit the
application of, the Highway Traffic Act.
9 - 41
5
(c)The Sections of this By-law that are listed in Schedule27to this By-law are
hereby designated for the purposes of Section 3 of O. Reg. 333/07 as parts of
this By-law to which the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law applies.
(d)If a vehicle has been left parked, standing or stopped in contravention of a
Designated Provision, the owner of the vehicle shall, upon issuance of a penalty
notice in accordance with the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law, be liable to
pay an administrative penalty and any administrative fees, in accordance with the
Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
(e)The Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 33, as amended from time to
time, or any successor thereof, does not apply to a contravention of a Designated
Provision of this By-law.
(f)Except as set out in Part XXI, Sections 1(a) and 1(e)of this By-law, all provisions
of this By-law and of any other applicable legislation shall continue to apply to the
Designated Provisions, in addition to the Parking Administrative Penalty By-law.
11.By-law No. 2007-138is hereby amended by adding a new Schedule 27, Designated
-law.
12.This By-law shall come into effect on June 3, 2019. Any parking infraction notices issued
prior to such date shall be subject to the provisions of the By-law under which they were
issued, as it was prior to the amendments contained herein.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchenerthis day ofApril, A.D.2019.
_____________________________________
Mayor
_____________________________________
Clerk
9 - 42
6
To By-law Number 2019-
Being new Schedule27to By-law Number 2007-138
DESIGNATED PROVISIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES
COLUMN 1COLUMN 2
ITEMDESIGNATED PROVISION
1Part V 1(a)
2Part V 2(a)
3Part V 2(a)
4Part V 2(b)
5Part V 2(b)
6Part V 2(b)
7Part V 2(d)
8Part V 2(e)
9Part V 3(a)(i)
10Part V 3(a)(ii)
11Part V 3(a)(ii)
12Part V 3(a)(iii)
13Part V 3(a)(iii)
14Part V 3(a)(iii)
15Part V 3(a)(iv)
16Part V 3(a)(v)
17Part V 3(a)(vi)
18Part V 3(a)(viii)
19Part V 3(a)(viii)
20Part V 3(a)(x)
21Part V 3(a)(xi)
22Part V 3(a)(xiii)
23Part V 3(a)(xiv)
24Part V 3(a)(xv)
25Part V 3(a)(xv)
26Part V 3(a)(xv)
27Part V 3(a)(xvi)
28Part V 3(a)(xvi)
29Part V 3(a)(xvi)
30Part V 3(a)(xvi)
31Part V 3(a)(xvi)
32Part V 3(a)(xvii)
33Part V 3(a)(xvii)
34Part V 3(a)(xxv)
9 - 43
7
35Part V 3(a)(xviii)
36Part V 3(b)
37Part V 3(a)(xix)
38Part V 3(a)(xx)
39Part V 3(a)(xxii)
40Part V 3(a)(xxi)
41Part V 3 (a)(xxiii)
42Part V 3(a)(xxiv)
43Part V 3(c)
44Part V 4(a)
45Part V 5
46Part V 6
47Part V 6
48Part V 7(i)
49Part V 7(ii)
50Part V 7(ii)
51Part V 7(iii)
52Part V 7(iii)
53Part V 7(iii)
54Part V 7(iv)
55Part V 8(a)
56Part V 9
57Part V 10
58Part V 11(a)
59Part V 12(a)
60Part V 12(a)
61Part V 12(b)
62Part V 12(c)
63Part V 12(d)
64Part V 12(e)
65Part V 12(f)
66Part V 12(g)
67Part V 12(h)
68Part VI 1(b)
69Part VI (1) (a) (c) (e)
70Part VI (1)(c)
71Part VI 1(e)
72Part VI 4(c)
73Part V 3(d)
74Part VI 3
75Part VI 3
9 - 44
{/I95
\[9 5
9 - 45
COMMUNITY & INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES COMMITTEE
Page 1UNFINISHED BUSINESS2019-04-15
DATE TARGET
SUBJECT (INITIATOR)INITIALLYDATE/STAFF
CONSIDEREDSTATUSASSIGNED
David Bergey Drive Bike Lane Implementation deferred
May 1, 2017B.Cronkite
2019
Street South Reconstruction project scheduled for Report INS-17-033
2018/2019
A.
Proposed winter sidewalk maintenance program: June 25, 2018
May 2019McCrimmon
components B, C, and D deferred to May 2019Report INS-18-023
-Jones
IF1 - 1